10 July 2010

Just How Passionate Should You Be?

At 211 degrees Fahrenheit, water is very hot. At 212 degrees, it boils.

Just one degree can make all the difference.

When water boils, you get steam. And with steam, you can power a train.

That's why business and branding gurus will have you know, 212 degrees Fahrenheit is the place to be. It's where inspiration ignites, and ideas combust spontaneously. It's where your passion comes alive for all to see.

Fahrenheit 212 is making the most of this sweet spot. Part consulting firm, part product lab, part ad agency, the New York-based company is scorching the landscape with the buzz generated by its business model, stellar client list, and yes, the work.

But let me be provocative, and offer this adjunct proposition: that on a personal level, Fahrenheit 211 is the place to be.

Yes, at 212, you get steam. And sure, you can power a train. But what happens is, your assets get vaporized in the process. You get hot air -- but nothing left for the long-term.

Business today is about passion. You'll need it if you hope to ignite your best self. You'll languish if you're lukewarm.

I'm passionate about what I do. And I believe my work for my clients is the better for it. But yesterday I learned that passion has a tipping point. A no-fly zone that, if indulged, can end in a nosedive off a cliff.

Yesterday I forgot that beyond people judgement and process judgement, I need to exercise engagement judgement: the deft skill of knowing who to engage, when to engage, and how best to go about it, in order to get a win-win result.

Yesterday, I let my passion for my work run ahead of my regard for people. And as a result, moved from 211 degrees to 212 and probably more.

That's the difference one degree can make. That's the difference between being on the leading edge of your craft ... and the bleeding edge.

Fahrenheit 211 is the place to be. The best players are those who can turn up the heat -- without getting burnt.

03 July 2010

FOUR POINTS: Heck No, We Won't Pitch!

LEADER:




Hilton Barbour
London




I am a sucker for a good manifesto. Who isn't? It worked for Lenin at the Finland Station, and it convinced a ragtag bunch of smelly Frenchmen to storm the Bastille. You could say the right manifesto, at the right time, can change history.

A friend shared this particular manifesto with me recently. I didn't automatically reach for my pitchfolk, but it did give me cause to reflect.

Blair Enns has been running his Win Without Pitching consultancy for almost a decade -- and making a tidy pile by all accounts -- so he's definitely on to something. Blair believes, and I agree, that pitching is often more harmful than good. That building a specialization, a zeal for continuous learning and a pragmatic, grown-up attitude to remuneration will set certain agencies apart.

So why is it that the entire idea of pitching is the one subject that rankles most? Recently the entire Belgian advertising industry banded together to enact a week-long boycott against client pitching practices, which they condemned as reckless and fickle. I must admit I was impressed by the unity they showed, but haven't seen evidence that the exercise did any more than get some added press for the agencies involved.

Like it or not, pitches are part of the fabric of the advertising industry. Or are they?

THE CLIENT VIEW

Clients say it's to get fresh thinking and insight on their strategy. That's valid. Sometimes it's a smokescreen to get 'free' thinking or to give the incumbent a kick up the posterior. That's BS. Some cover a portion of agency pitch time (good) while others don't (cheap). Some are genuinely looking for agencies that they want to build a healthy, respectful peer-to-peer relationship with, and will act accordingly. That's Nirvana and, like the five-leafed clover, they have been known to exist in nature.

AGENCIES

Agencies will throw themselves into them, or not. I've walked away from pitches where you just knew a tsunami of pain lay in wait. But there have been other pitches more akin to BP's Deep Horizon -- capitalized all our resources, created sleepless nights and unbearable tension, and only succeeded in spreading toxic excrement everywhere.

So why, for the love of God and small children, does this charade continue?

The recession? Sure. Deperate times call for desperate measures. Every client needs to squeeze every last ounce of efficiency and fresh thinking out of their agencies, or find one willing to do the job for less that the incumbent. Every agency, especially those in global networks with scary bunches of shareholders, needs to show how they are going to get that elusive 15% annualized growth. I get it. I don't applaud it, but I get it.

Why is it that both agencies and clients can't move to a framework where common sense and business acuman prevail:

1. Do your research. Which are the agencies doing strong work that results in quantifiable results? Which are acknowledged masters in your sector? Start there.

2. Chemistry. Meet these guys, find out if you really like them. Our work can be bloody stressful, so wouldn't you rather be surrounded by people you get on with?

3. Stop the beauty pageant. Asking for strategy and creative from 15 agencies? You're having a laugh. That's merely a sign of laziness, or worse, arrogance on the client's side. You'll waste less of your own and your agencies' time if you pick just 4 who meet the criteria above.

4. Be quick in making a decision. Elephants have shorter gestation periods than some pitches. Repitching erodes goodwill (and the will to live) and starts everyone off with a pissy attitude. Stop it. Make your choices, make them quickly and then let the losers get back to more profitable things.

For agencies, the advice is probably similar: Grow a pair. You know if you're getting messed around. Your agency reputation, staff morale and personal integrity have to be worth more than any pitch. And if you think you're going to change how you're treated after you win the business, you're too naive to have the job you do.


POINT: Kuala Lumpur





Joy Abdullah






The malaise of pitching afflicts the advbertising industry all over. KL is no different. In fact, given the industry size, there is a paucity of large-spencing clients which makes it a buyers' market: the clients call in all agencies, accredited or not. Some of the big agencies (nowadays) refuse to pitch without the pitching fee. To which clients pay the 3 or 4 top level agencies, call in other smaller ones, and have, at any point in time, a total of 8-10 agencies pitching for business that's worth approximately US$300,000 (in annualised billings)!

Pitching is expected and done in order to keep the agencies' lifeblood (revenue) flowing. Even on established contracts, clients call in others to pitch for sub-brands and in some cases for different communication channels.

So the million-dollar question is, can a service business succeed without pitching?

YES!

New business can be generated provided the creative services industry is willing to change. For change comes about if one believes it can be done and goes out to better oneself. Change to group together as an industry and have, for starters, one standard financial term.

Let's look at the business model differently. Take a leaf out of the books of the big management consulting firms and we'd note that most of the twelve proclamations in Blair Enns' manifesto are what make up their business models. They command respect and are sought after by the corporate and public sector for their specialized services.

So specialize, develpop conversations with prospects and current clients, present and discuss simplistically (be basic), listen to cliewnts' needs, have self-value and ask for the appropriate financial remuneration upfront. All of these will enable a company to develop a strong pull for its services.


At the end of the day it goes back to the fundamental ethics of benefitting the other person in order to benefit oneself i.e. when you help someone benefit, he/she develops trust in you and trust is a MUST in ensuring sustainable and profitable business.


POINT: Texas


Ben Gaddis



Mr Enns' manifesto is inspirational, aggressive and in my mind, a bit aspirational. As agency folks we know pitching is not ideal but in most cases a necessary evil. In my humble opinion, our aversion to pitching has less to do wih protecting the quality and integrity of our work and everything to do with resources.

Most agencies are fully tapped resource-wise and pitches constantly threaten to be the straw that breaks the preverbial camel's back. Yet some of the best work I've seen comes out of competitive pitches because they force us to be instinctive, react quickly and in the end, go with our gut. What are we to do then? Don't stop pitching. Pitch less.

My belief is mot agencies should pitch 1/2 to 1/3 of the business they currently do. Then in turn, focus those saved resources on proactive business development. Here are a few criteria to help determine when NOT to pitch:

No Access
Great creative solutions are built on the understanding of a business problem. You can't deliver those solutions without a true understanding of a client's business inside and out. If a potential client doesn't allow for an hour's Q&A session with the decision-makers, it's probably not worth participating, even at the RFI stage. If they're not willing to put in that short amount of time, chances are you're not the front-runner, it's a cattle call, or they're not looking for a true partner.

Budget
How many times have you heard, "we don't really have a set budget, so we were just hoping that you could tell us what this would cost?" Wrong. Every client has a budget in mind, and typically the ones that have enough money to accomplish what they have laid out in the RFP are happy to share. No budget, no pitch.

Three's Company
I hate giving away creative as much as Mr Enns, but clients buy ideas and they want to see them before they do. However, giving them away is not the answer. Don't provide creative if there are more than three agencies, At that point, hypothetically, you have a 33% chance of winning. Knowing the budget and having met the decision-makers should allow you to reasonably determine whether to gamble on spec creative.


Sidebar: Since we've employed the system, every pitch we've participated in had less than three agencies in the final round. And one didn't even ask for creative. Maybe clients are catching on.

Although they seem simple, when combined with a commonsense new business filter, these criteria will typically reduce the number of pitches an agency participates in. We have cut the number of pitches by almost 1/2 and it's been remarkable.

What now? Here'a a thought. Take the resources you've saved and direct half their time towards proactively pitching target accounts you know you want to work with. Direct the other half of their time proactively solving your existing clients' problems, outside of what the dedicated teams are working on. My money, and experience, says those efforts will pay off twice to three times as much.



POINT: Singapore



David Shaw





In my previous lives, I was an advertising copywriter, then a client marketer. Both gigs gave me the unique privilege of experiencing the thrill of the hunt, as well as the chill of realizing that yanking my account away from an incumbent agency probably meant someone's ricebowl would be shattered, someone's head would roll.

You quickly learn to be responsible once you recognize the ripples of your actions.

So do I denouce the whole notion of pitching? Perhaps surprisingly, not entirely. As an agency creative director, I could see the value of putting the agency through its paces -- much like office towers conduct fire drills -- to see if protocols are in place and everyone knows their part. It's good to stress-test agency assets once in a while; it keeps folks sharp, and can enliven a slow month. But that's the operative phrase ... "once in a while".

You don't see fire drills conducted at your office every week now, do you? Yet that's what heaps of agencies do ... piching anything that moves. Like the inveterate gambler who walks into a casino knowing the odds stacked against him, agencies push their luck, hoping to strike paydirt. But even if they do, the rewards can be fleeting. Look at what's happened with Enfatico and their Dell jackpot.

It gets better. FMCG giant Reckitt Benckiser this week rocked India's ad industry by requiring agencies to pay for the privilege of pitching its local media account. Up to 10 media agencies have banded together to boycott the exercise, declining to fork out the US$10,000 pitch fee. ZenithOptimedia is one of only a few multinational agencies thought to still be in conversations with the client.

So what's an agency to do? My FOUR POINTS pals have served up some pragmatic advice, so I won't play the broken record, other than to commend British agency BBH for turning their philosophy of never doing a creative pith into a competitive advantage. Mind you, it was a competitive disadvantage for 5-10 years before they turned the corner -- but a principle isn't a principle unless it costs you something.

We should all be so ballsy.

12 June 2010

Can You Price Yourself Too Low?

Out on the retail battleground, the giant's just blinked.

Wal-Mart, a chain of large discount department stores with annual sales of US$408 billion (no, that's not a typo) that has over the years carved a market position as the bastion for "everyday low prices", this week announced 30% discounts on 22 popular, everyday items.

Er ... hang on. Run that by me again.

You mean to say the home of "everyday low prices" hasn't been offering me the lowest possible price? That all these years, I've been hoodwinked into thinking that Wal-Mart was offering the best possible price, and staying viable by playing the volume game?

"Everyday low price" traditionally means that you can expect a terrific price on any item, so much so that it isn't worth the hassle of shopping around or clipping coupons to get something better.

One gets the impression that an "everyday low price" retailer is figuratively skimming the basement floor, with no room to offer further reductions. Now Wal-Mart's announcement has suggested the presence of a whole subterranean chamber ... jostling room for further price reductions by retailers in a desperate slide to the bottom.

Businesses should avoid this like the plague. There is no happy ending in such a scenario. Even the giant that outlasts its rivals will find it impossible to claw back decent margins. Nothing is quicker than a consumer pouncing on a paradigm shift.

Wal-mart isn't crazy, of course. Its price rollback program allows it to surreptitiously raise the prices on another basket of products. It makes for a lot of work; but if managed efficiently, can make a viable program.

I'm just more concerned about the mindspace it has abdicated, the birthright it has given up. By abandoning its mental lock on "everyday low prices", Wal-Mart is left with the residual image of a bloody big store where you can literally get lost trying to find your favourite cereal -- or your precious kids.

Try putting a price on that.

05 June 2010

Introducing FOUR POINTS: A New Kind Of Marketing Blog

Today I'm going to introduce an inaugural post from FOUR POINTS, a different kind of marketing blog. Actually this is merely a preview of forthcoming atractions ...

What is FOUR POINTS? A monthly post of four marketing folks spread across the globe. You'll get four opinions, sometimes shared but often not, on an interesting trend in the crazy world of marketing. As ideas spread across the globe with lightning speed, here's your chance to get a global perspective from just one blog.

Who is FOUR POINTS? Hilton, a marketing provocateur based in London. Joy, a marketing consultant in Malaysia specializing in the Muslim consumer. Ben, a digital maven from Austin, Texas. And of course, myself, a brandgelist and consultant who calls Singapore home.



Hilton Barbour
http://www.hiltonbarbour.com/




Each of us has had the opportunity to work with some of the world's most respected brands, but -- and here's the kicker -- within very different cultures and from totally diferent points on the map. We think this little mix could get kinda spicy.

We each manage an individual blog where you can get your fill of our own thinking on a myriad of oher subjects. Not surprisingly, you can also find us on LinkedIn, Facebook, and on the end of the occasional tweet.

If there's a subject you'd like FOUR POINTS to tackle, just drop me a comment.

Looking forward to the dialogue.

29 May 2010

How Strong Brands Get That Way

I was flipping through some magazines while on a plane the other day when I came across an ad for luxury brand Louis Vuitton. In this particular execution, celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz is shown conferring with her subject, Mikhail Baryshnikov, one of the greatest ballet dancers of the 20th century.

Now, this isn't a post about the LV brand (though that is a tasty piece casually anchoring the bottom left of the advertisement). Rather, I'll draw your attention to what caught my eye, on the bottom right corner on the ad.

Look at Mikhail's feet. That's right; the pair of stubbly, calloused cudgels. Thick-veined, powerful paws that pass for feet. Blunt implements that have launched him on a million double tour en l'airs, taking the collective breath of the world away.

Mikhail wears his feet proudly, with no self-consciousness, embarassment or apology. They are his badge of honour. They bear mute testament to hundreds of thousands of hours of practice until he is as close to perfection as is humanly possible. They project his personal brand essence effortlessly, scintillatingly.

Is it any wonder why so many brands fail to manifest themselves consistently through the acts of their brand champions and ambassadors? Companies acknowledge the power of branding; and some even invest in an overhaul of their brand. But nine times out of ten, they stop when the logo is locked down and stationery is done. They put their feet up when the visual communications system is templatized and brand manuals handed out. They have mistaken brand identification for brand internalization.

Think of this as the litmus test of a company's (re)branding program. If it declares success when all the brand rallies are done, the website is overhauled, and memos are sent out, it will not see any permanent change in brand behaviours once the novelty and emotion of the brand (re)launch is but a distant memory. Like the runner who eases up 10 metres before the finish line, it runs the risk of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Embedding is the key. Embedding brand action plans that have been developed, into the operational cadence of the business. Cascading the call to do things differently. And inspecting the progress made on action plans at regular intervals. These are the hallmarks of a business that leverages its brand. Just look at how it permeates the culture at Zappos, at Patagonia, at Harley-Davidson.

Branding is hard work. And it's not just the preserve of top management -- though it must start there. At every customer touchpoint, each and every day, it's up to all of us.