It’s time to steal back our tricks from politics.

Politics, PR and Marketing are inextricably linked. The race to the Whitehouse is without doubt the finest example on the planet that a 360 degree approach to communications is both what works and what is needed. It’s funny and tragic then that our industry is still struggling and in fighting to mimic this collaboration. Whilst we watch the most impressive viral campaign in history from Barack Obama bring in millions in donations, we are still holding inter-agency meetings and arguing over who’ll write the contact report.

Why is it that whilst the political engine, with little historic experience of brands, marketing and technology do our work so well whilst we still can’t stitch together PR and Advertising,  media and digital or even planning and creative? To say the political world is eating our dog-food is a gross understatement, what’s happening so successfully in politics today is humiliating our industry and we have to shape up pretty quick and take back what’s ours.

My first point and probably the simple answer to this is to go out there and start hiring the people behind the campaigns (I don’t mean Mark Penn – he’s doing fine). What I do mean is the new young bright political evangelists that have given up their time, freely to find ways to market their candidate to the press and people so effectively. Instead of worrying about the next op-ed opportunity or panel to put the ECD on, I’d be briefing recruitment companies to start tracking and attracting the power behind these political campaigns and creatives.  You never know,  we might just succeed there, we have a lot to offer – higher salaries (probably) a vast array of different and exciting work and career longevity.

However, what we lack is passion. My next observation is that we need to harness the passion and loyalty that the political parties bring to their people every day. There was a time in this world – which we’ve all been recently reminded of thanks to Mad Men when our industry was exalted, we were the dream job – it was the place to work. Less so now. Why is that and how did we lost our pride?

Much of it might be down to the homogenization of marketing businesses and not the disciplines which is necessary. By that I mean the buy, sell, acquire, trading, merging of ad agencies and other marketing companies which slowly chips away at what makes them special and gives them their ‘edge’.  Hung governments are never captivating, they are compromised and leadership invariable fails. Maybe we’ve fallen foul to this. it’s a truth that the new agencies, the super cool agencies seem to attract the bright people – is that because the are ‘small and boutiquey and push the envelope’ or is it actually because they are independent that they fundamentally stand for something like the parties do right now?

Isn’t it telling that you can follow a CMO of an advertising agency from one group company to another – probably using the same rolodex, the same approach and no doubt the same jokes from corridor to corridor. What does that say to us about the power of our brands? Doesn’t it, in some way, make a mockery of all we tell our clients about standing for something. What do today’s large agencies actually stand for?

Leadership is my next point. I have no doubt that we’re not going to see a Obama & Co agency starting any time soon but how do we instill the real power of leadership into today’s agency leaders. What is the succession management plan for advertising. Looking back at recent history, Bullmore, Ogilvy, Chiat & co helped define what their firms stood for – and lead from the front creating insanely loyal and driven people completely committed to their job. Today who do we really have? 

Richard Edelman has done a phenomenal job of continuing to lead his business forward with the drive and dedication that’s so evidently missing from his other marketing leaders. Now some of this, again,  might come down to the holding company squeeze on independence and drive. However, are today’s marketing CEO’s too addicted to quarterly results and margin and not enough the the product they actually make and the people that make it. 

I walked into an agency once in Chicago (who shall remain nameless) to find on every one of their dozen plasma screens in reception work playing from other agencies. When I asked why I was told that the CEO wanted to show that they were passionate about the work for all agencies in their holding company. This struck me as entirely insane and without direction or passion. 

Bob Jeffrey at JWT made it rule number one that he had to see work regularly – every day and he does. He understands that to lose touch with your product (like a politician losing touch with the people) is brand suicide.  

So we need to prepare now for the leaders of tomorrow – identify the talent that can not just manage a p&l but bring together a philosophy and I think we’d be helped by looking a bit further a field than just our somewhat incestuous industry where recruitment is akin to the same old people throwing their keys in the bucket. 

But back to my opening point, the 360 approach. This, I think is the single biggest issue for agencies today and one that’s been talked about ad infinitum. I don’t want to harp on about it like every one in agency world does (saying but not doing) but I do want to make one point. 

How can you expect agencies to work well to together when they don’t know what they stand for apart?

Barry Diller talks of Creative Conflict, the need to push your ideas, positioning, beliefs and self even to find out what makes you tick. It’s time this industry created some conflict to blow away the past, unblock the pores of progress and take some pride in itself.  

Marketing has become so risk averse, so ‘safe’ and therefore dull. We seem to be scared to stand up for ourselves in case its not what our clients’ believe in – but we forget that our clients hired us for who we are – not what we want them to be. 

So let’s forget about 360 for now, about trying to date and smooch other companies, I believe we all individually as agencies need a makeover first; just like Tony Blair and his team gave Britain New Labour, we desperately need New Marketing. 

That’s change we can believe it.

The power of the Op-Ed

Working, as I do, with a number of well known CEO’s and industry leaders, it has come to my attention that it is slowely becoming easier and easier to place comment pieces. There seems to be a genuine insatiable urge to put the opinions, views and philosophies of these types of people up there with the independent editorial stance of the publication concerned.

I think it raises a couple of interesting points.

1. I’m furtunate to be on the advisory board for an innovative new product aimed at pushing more news out to more people – direct to consumer (it is called NewsForce). Whilst working with them, admiring their confidence and a clearly very  smart product, I came across a proof-point which I now believe carries some weight. The fact is there ARE less journalists to go around. AdWeek has just laid off more people (it’s a miracle how in the face of such adversity it still manages to get all the real news first)… the NYT is looking at cuts and the print industry is absolutely contracting. So less press. That’s good for Op-Eds, but is is good for independence of thought? Is this content being rigourously fact checked – or is it a free for all sounding board?

2. Where’s the Op-Ed for Joe the Plumber? The whole world is bottom-up now (so we are lead to believe) so why isn’t mother media welcoming in all types of people to have their say. Don’t tell me they do via the letters page – I mean, who really reads that? Isn’t that where the subscription details and cartoons are? Isn’ that really the little condescending area where editors toy with readers views and just let them vent? I’d like to see Op-Eds for the people.

3. How safe are Op-Eds for those that draft them? And how many of them are truly drafted by the person who’s name they appear under. So how true are they really? Or are they just a time-pressured CEO signing off an idea they think won’t cause too much trouble? I don’t think many journalists ghost write… it doesn’t feel quite so true does it?

Anyway, here’s an Op-Ed that’s currently running on HuffPo, drafted by Bob Jeffrey, global CEO of JWT. I like the concept a lot. And I didn’t write it. Click here.

Google loses its virginity?

Is this the first time Google has ever advertised on its homepage? By that I mean this:

I know Google own, err, Google, and I know they are entitled to do as they wish with their homepage, but something changed today. Something felt sullied, dirty almost. It was as if we lost a bit of innocence in search. Of course, Iit’s not the end of ‘don’t be evil’ – but I worry if it’s the beginning of google.com becoming a billboard for their partnerships and products (beyond the online offer that co-exists normally).

It’s also a risk surely – what if the G1 doesn’t cut it? It’s not getting the best reviews so far and I wonder if that in itself could create some brand damage for the search giant.

As someone who was a .mac user since the beginning and then had to swallow the horrific shortfalls of the mobileme launch, I have first hand experience of how an iconic brand can, frankly, screw itself over by backing a product that isn’t as ‘pure’ as the brand. I wish them luck with it, at the same time its a bit sad to see ads on the homepage.

Why I’m all about China.

I love China, I simply love it. I’ve been fortunate enough to have travelled there 4 times in the past two years for work related trips and I have to say I totally ‘get’ the country. You might be aware that upon my last trip I was in the Four Seasons Shanghai when I felt the room start to sway – it was the earthquake.

But there’s a new movement in China today, one of harmony, pride and advancement. I’ve not just been in global hotel chains where one room is much like another, I’ve worked alongside Chinese people in Beijing and Shanghai and even made a few email friends wouldn’t you know. I’ve no doubt that’s hardly a qualification to be an expert on middle earth,  however I do think it’s given me some insights, especially as the incredible spectacle of the 29th Olympiad unfolds in front of a global audience.

When I first visited, back in 2006 (which feels like a century compared to my more recent visits) I remember walking with George Gallate, the then CEO of Euro RSCG in the region (and the digital network). As we walked along the street he stopped me and told me to look at a car. The Volvo in front was shiny and new and clearly had hardly been driven. Except it wasn’t a Volvo. It’s was a ‘Cherry’. A complete counterfeit of the Volvo and looking pretty identical to me (trust me, I couldn’t tell a Robin Reliant from a Hummer).

Apparently Volvo (who happened to be Euro’s client until they lost the pitch) took Cherry to court, and demonstrated that, down to the parts, all the mechanics and engineering for both vehicles was completely interchangeable. Possibly an old advertising wives’ tale – but a good indicator of the so called boom market then.

Step forward to last year, when China buys the defunct Rover brand and renames it Roewe, owns most of the creative concepts and starts advertising by buying 20 story high billboards opposite the brand new Regent Shanghai.

So in 12 months China went from ‘the copier country’ to the purchaser of institution brands and the probably more efficient marketing that goes with it into this year.

When I took my last Global CEO to China just last year we held a round table meeting with investors, second stage financed companies and opinion formers in Beijing. Just a couple of years ago China was importing the important and outputting the irrelevant (unless you like cheap socks and kids toys) now the discussion around the table was the exporting of the big ideas and the off-shoring of labor.

Just last week the WSJ lead on how China was upping its game in the manufacture of technology and automotive, shunning the old smoky and dangerous textile and plastic factories. My old CEO said ‘the future is in the export of ideas from China’ and he’s right as is bring proven (with the addition of credit notes to prop up the USA’s faltering economy).

But for me, my China is about the Chinese. I know that democracy can be a significant stumbling block to development (India is still a little confused about wanting to share wealth as opposed to control it) so China has a ‘leg up’ in terms of the speed of development. When you have no choice about Hutons being destroyed or water being taken from farmers, you can move quickly to grow and expand. So the people come second to development it seems.

But the young people I’ve met are filled with a real optimism. They know that their past isn’t pure, that they as a country have things they may not be so proud of. But they are looking forward, and in doing so the take a rightful position as a global inspiration and example to us all.

We know there are human rights issues, as there will be today been in the UK with Gordon Brown’s 42 day detention doctrine. Or the captors held without trial in grim conditions in Cuba courtesy of the ‘War of Terror’ – happening today. As a Western people we excuse this behavior and endorse or even forgive our elected government for inflicting these abuses. We are quick to look away from our own behavior and criticize that of others. It’s probably a colonial hangover.

Because, as it says in the bible – and I’m not one to quote that text often ‘And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?’ Matthew 7:3