The Battle of Big Thinking

Took place at The British Library Thurs 6th Nov. Check it out here



It's a conference - but like Under The Influence - not a boring one. It's a number of battles between specialists from certain areas of the industry, each given no more than 15 minutes to get their big thinking across. One winner was crowned the biggest from each field... and then one crowned the biggest thinker of them all.

It’s kinda dubbed ‘X-Factor For Brains’ and after each session the audience vote on cool little electronic keypads for which speaker was the biggest thinker. And each delegate got a cool Mexican wrestler mask pin badge that had a massive dome. Nice simple idea and identity.

Here's a rather long summary of what went down...

Big Creative Thinking:

Steve Aldridge, CD at Partners Andrews Aldridge reckoned we've got to think differently and produce ideas that don't feel like advertising as there is so much noise and advertising it just blends in rather than stands out. Consumers are better at avoiding and decoding advertising so why bother. Communications have to be natural and intuitive - brands have to find their natural voice - and when they do, the comms will seem like real, genuine conversations. This leads to subtlety that hits home with the audience you're targeting, but is invisible to most others. He showed some clever examples that I'd broadly describe as ambient (message and media done right).

In short

1 - stop doing self-conscious ad ideas
2 - Ideas that don't feel like marketing are best
3 - look for the perfect meeting of what is said and how it's communicated

All obvious stuff, but interesting.

Next up was Graham Fink, CD of M&C. He was all about 'Opposite Thinking'. He referenced 'The Bilbao Effect' - 16 years a go a complete shit hole and a city in economic crisis. Then 2 opposite forces met which led to it's regeneration... local GOVT wanted to do something about it - but what?; and The Guggenheim Foundation wanted to build a gallery. Frank Gehry was enlisted and the stunning Guggenheim Bilbao was born which kick started the renaissance of the city. The gallery attracts 1m visitors a year; 90% are foreign; which generates €150m a year for the city. This massive influx meant the rest of the city followed suit and Bilbao is cool once more.

So this opposite thinking is a collision of minds - put two very different big thinkers together and surprising stuff happens. But it’s not just big thinkers and the right people - these people also need bollocks and to be brave. He thinks this is what is needed with the recession ("Don't survive it, attack it").

And he's a bit disenchanted with old thinking, so he's doing something about it - cheekily launching 'The Big Thinking Club' to a captive audience - which you can check out online but I couldn't find the link - but he will essentially get people like you (Big Thinkers) paired up with other big thinkers from different walks of life and we'll see what happen, best idea gets made - that kind of thing. Cool.

Then up pops Fernanda Romano, a CD at JWT. Brazilian girl, very entertaining, slightly mad cap and meandering, taking the piss out of the British ("you have a sense of defeat, no one talks on the tube...why?")... right through to ancient historic references; pirates, British Imperialism - the point of which was to basically say we need to break the rules, ignore processes - we need to be creative pirates basically (not steal work I hope).

Overall, I didn't take too much out it - but I enjoyed it none-the-less.

Then completing this 4-way shoot out was Dave Trott from CST. I've seen Dave talk a few times and he's always good value. And as per the last time I saw him, he lamented the wastage that goes on with TV advertising… 300 ads an hour; no stand out; all fighting for the same share of voice; £18bn spend annually; £17bn wasted each year as people couldn’t remember the ad, let alone what it was selling. He has a point.

His point overall thought was that big thinking is actually predatory thinking – competitive, radical thinking. Showed examples of predatory thinking from WW2 when the Brits thought the Nazi’s were invincible as they powered across Europe… our response to gee up moral was to trumpet on about our own strengths (shit camo where armoured motor bikes were covered in branches – they looked rubbish) – it didn’t work. Then someone decided to make the Nazi’s look vulnerable – and a stop frame film was made and aired across cinema which took the piss out of them and they became a laughing stock in this country. And importantly, made them look beatable. Cool.

Small thinking is merely knee jerk and gets you nowhere.

AND THE WINNER WAS GRAHAM FINK

Big Research Thinking:

For me this was a slight let down and not as good as last time I went.

First up was Les Binet of DDB Matrix (in-house research consultancy). This was a dry powerpoint, but I liked it as it was simple and backed up by real fact and research they’ve been doing – and a nice clear take out.

Basically, common sense is not best practice – because the common sense model of how advertising works is wrong. 5 things here:

1 – Ads increase sales – WRONG – price has more impact
2 – Brand loyalty increases sales – WRONG – brand penetration has more impact
3 – Awareness and image are vital – WRONG – these are the worst predictors of success
4 – A motivating brand message increases sales – WRONG – emotional rules the rational (just look at Gorilla)
5 – Stand out increases sales – WRONG – likeability helps, stand out is not the point.

In summary – fame is the game – brands that are talked about are thought about and become part of the ‘cultural lexicon’ – are the ones which create profit. And people will pay a premium for talked about brands.

Followed by Tim Britton from YouGov who essentially argued that research is too complex, asks too many questions, many of which are wrong anyway and that it is generally over engineered. I’m sure we can all see the truth in that.

His big idea was more long-term research communities that you build dialogue with – establishing a ‘space’ for simple research. In fact it’s not research – it’s conversations with your community. Was OK.

And completing this research slugging match was Mandy Pooler from Kantar (a WPP research company) who argued that research is becoming more and more important (a researcher was recently taken hostage somewhere in the world by guerrillas who wanted the behavourial knowledge of the people that she had for political gains)… and that it must be important as Sorrell as just spent £1.2bn acquiring a research Co.

Showed some good ideas for research that would benefit creatives; planners; media types and digital people and reflected on McCain and Obama mentioning privacy as a key thread of their election battles as this will be a hot topic moving forward due to the ‘data-shadow’ we leave behind with loads of electronic transactions of many types.

AND THE WINNER WAS LES BINET

Big PR Thinking:

A new entrant as a category – very entertaining, if a little repetitive.

Kicked off by Mark Borkowski of Borkowski PR. Lively chit chat this – some great toys shown at the start (an airplane with FUCK branded across it’s wings – flying fuck; clitoris allsorts sweets…) – what else would you expect from a dude wearing a purple blazer?

Then went on to reaffirm the importance of the ‘story’ in PR – if you ain’t got a real, authentic, interesting one – don’t bother. Got one and you’ll get fame – no matter whether you’re brand or celeb, etc.

And it’s often over looked by other areas of the ad world, the importance of the story in PR, and that it has to have a heart and soul – more so these days. Interesting but not rocket science.

Followed by Paul Melody of Freud Comms. Now this I was digging – it’s a shame he had so much to say as he said it so fast I couldn’t keep up.

The gist was… there has been a seismic shift in the news agenda due to recent developments such as the financial crisis, Obama, wars, the crumbling of trusted institutions, etc. Allied to this, the internet and media fragmentation, citizen journalism, etc mean recipients are now participants.

And this presents a massive opportunity – so long as you’re story is solid (truthful, believable, etc) at it’s core but flexible enough to meander it’s way through media and be propagated, etc. The best stories and strategies are evolving all the time yet rooted / anchored by a consistency.

Obama being a prime example of this – a solid story yet flexible enough to be open source, transparent, etc – because he’s confident in his view and aspirations for change. And because his story and view are anchored, he can have a consistent yet flexible view on whatever is chucked at him by journo’s, the financial crisis, etc.

And this story and the campaign it led to was one of the main reasons why he defeated McCain so easily. He played the field, the times, the technology very well. But every story needs a good narrator and he certainly was one – but that narrator can be anyone when it comes to PR.

And the brands that sum these approaches up are the obvious ones – Innocent, Apple, Nike, etc

Then he compared this to the BBC in the wake of the Brand/Ross/Satanic Slut episode and how they never got their story straight or set as it had a confused core – therefore got pulled about and they didn’t have a chance to respond coherently, etc.

It may sound obvious – boring even – but it wasn’t at all. Good chat.

Then came Angie Moxham of 3 Monkey’s who reflected lots of what Paul said, but did it in a slightly different way.

Essentially aligning PR with quantum physics – stories have their facts which are like particles. What matters is what people believe about those facts – belief is everything – perception is reality. We see things as we are, not as they are.

Nowadays it’s all about a good story then letting it go - the tightest grip is an open hand… brands exist in the minds of the consumer so let them take it and run – as long as the story is anchored, true and interesting – only good can happen.

Media literacy means the public see through stuff nowadays and you can only really trust friends, peers, family and community – in the real world and online. These are like digital campfires and you’ve just got to stoke them. You have to let the story ‘ride the quantum wave’ – not hold it back.

There was obviously more to it than that – SHE WON

Big Marketing Thinking:

This was difficult slot to fill right before lunch and I was a little disappointed in truth.

First up was Ian Armstrong from Honda. All I can say is he’s a very clever man – did his whole presentation about the brain and the importance of understanding it in marketing today.

The brain as predictor and that it expects reality to live up to expectation set by marketing (congruency) and that’s the biggest downfall of modern marketing – that it doesn’t in most cases.

He urged people to stop bigging up your brand too much as you set your own bar too highly; and that you need to get the product as good as possible – then raise the bar.

It was heavy going and I wish I’d have ‘got it’ more – but he’s definitely onto something.

Then Claire Harrison-Church from Boots talked at length about you have to define your brand’s role in the world – core competency meets the challenge meets involving consumers is what it’s about.

Nike inspire and motivate; Google make info easy; Boots gives you the right to feel good. And so on.

Then she went on to describe how Boots operates and how people really live the brand internally, etc. It was OK – I’d summarise, you need a clear POV, positioning, a good product and then live that to that max. Simple stuff.

AND THE WINNER WAS IAN ARMSTRONG


Big Planning Thinking:

So we kicked off after lunch with the planners and this was by far the best session of the day.

David Bain of BMB kicked it right off nicely. He reckons the marketing bubble might be about to burst in the same way the financial industry’s has (but not in a financial sense).

Ideas and brands have an over inflated opinion of themselves. And that consumers don’t care that much and brands need to get over themselves and that they’ve lost touch with their reality.

He cited amazing ads like Sony Rabbits, Balls and Paint; and Guinness Dominoes are mute spectacles and slightly bombastic (love that word). They aren’t sympathetic to our times.

Brands are over assumptious and just presume engagement from audiences (“no one goes to a party if you know it’ll be shit”). He cited a Kleenex campaign where it positioned itself as a great listener and tissues are part of that whole thing – when arguably they are not (“Mucus management maybe, the gateway to a higher emotional state, they are not”).

And that brands need to find their ‘scale’ – it’s currently BIG BRAND and small consumer; when it needs to be BIG PERSON and small brand – and that we need to return to a more human scale in this current climate. He cited Boots, Carling and Walkers as good down to earth, more human examples.

There is a need for more humble thinking and for ‘brand humility’, sympathy and charm.

Very good chat, funny and engaging.


Then up popped Nikki Crumpton of McCanns. This was a great talk too – about how we as agencies need to stop being ‘ideas agencies’ and more ‘agents of ideas’. In this day and age nobody owns an idea – they are like sharks that will die if they stop moving.

Cited Google, Wiki, Amazon, Eden Project, Chaos Theory and Linux as examples of connected and open source ‘ideas’ that are future proof.

And then had a good old rant about how ideas need to be built on difference – not similarity and that agencies are all trying to own ideas and the implementation of them when they shouldn’t and can’t. How agencies don’t get this and how integrated agencies aren’t properly integrating. And that we should facilitate and manage the idea rather than own it. How we need to be always in beta and let go a bit more.

And to conclude, the observation was that “we are a close sourced industry working in an open source world” and that if we can change that we can have expansive ideas and greater opportunity.

Very sharp chat.

Finally we had the excellent Aussie David Hackworthy of Red Brick Road. Great delivery – all about the evolution of brands. Basically about how we just clone stuff at the minute, how 360 marketing is usually just matching luggage, etc, etc.

So where do we go next? Well we’re currently all about co-creationism which gets the consumer involved but it’s just positive tampering really – not evolution. It is only skin deep and many brands now look and behave like ‘Frankenbrands’ because they’ve let consumers mess with them too much (cited Becks as a good example of this).

Then he talked about how Silicon Valley has the perfect spirit of co-creationism – very 2.0 – yet it is Apple – who are way more closed off and independent and protective of their stuff - could be the way to go.

Then went on to cite Apple’s genius / evil streak because they evolve on a more fundamental level – they release products, constantly update them and make them better; kill them off; release something different and as a product and brand it’s always evolving. Not just tampering.

And how Apple used 2 opposites coming together (technology that looks nice) – sex and death as he put it - as a continual hook to evolve – and that other brands are doing that too (Persil – good dirt / Wii – physical video games / Starbucks – mass customisation / Marmite – love hate, etc) to give them their evolutionary idea / reason for being.

And because this evolution is so fundamental, he thinks these are the strongest brands and the ones that can survive anything. Top stuff indeed, as the point is so often overlooked and we have to paper over cracks or polish turds.

AND THE WINNER WAS DAVID HACKWORTHY (deservedly so – but only by a whisker)

Big Comms Planning Thinking:

Another new entrant as a category…

This saw Andrew Stephens of Goodstuff suggesting there needs to be an uprising and revolution around people in communities – and not just online ones – but more so real local communities. It could be where commercial and real community come together.

How clients are global but not acting local; how people are rebelling against big global brands and institutions and how actions need to speak louder than words.

How hard work from brands can revolutionise local communities, etc. There was more to it than that, but it a relatively interesting angle all round.

Then came Jason Gonsalves of BBH who did the whole quantum physics analogy again – this time for media, audiences and stuff rather than stories and PR – but a similar idea.

There are 3 main facets to this theory…

1 – That there can be many facets to an individual – various mind states, occasions, etc – we’re not always the same person.
2 – Audiences have a duality – they are individuals yet part of communities
3 – That the world – like quantum physics – is full of uncertainty – and we need to provide certainty.

It was OK – but went a bit over my head at times.

Finally Jez Groom of EGS hit the stage and had some major technical difficulties which was funny. But once he got going it was cool – about the evolution of advertising.

How we moved from brand exposure (message over media) to brand engagement (media over message) and we need to move to brand expression where the content (message) and context (media) of an idea combine to create it. How the ‘what how who where’ are all still there – just a bit jumbled up.

And we need new agencies and new processes to produce these new kinds of ‘brand expression’ pieces of work.

AND JASON GONSALVES WALKED AWAY WITH THE WIN.

Big Publishing Thinking:

The final session was all about publishing – another new category.

We had David Hepworth of publisher Development Hell, who published The Word and Mixmag, up first.

He drew parallels with the music industry in the 60’s as a good model for publishing – how people like the Stones, Beatles and the like just made songs, got them out there and did another one a few weeks later, etc (little and often kept cropping up). It was quick fire stuff – not 4 months to make an album, another 4 months before it is released. But importantly they knew their audience and went for it – they went for the core – not the fluff around the outside as if you try and appeal to everyone, you end up with a weak product.

You have to cultivate the fan (reader / consumer) and think small not big – and just do stuff.

Was a funny if slightly hollow chat.

Nigel Newton of Bloomsbury Publishing was next. They publish loads like Harry Potter but aren’t one of the mega publishers.

Now this was a funny one. He essentially made one point very well in loads of different ways – and that was how we need to trust gut instinct more – he has to in the publishing world – he has no idea if something will be a success or not.

So embrace instinct – not analysis – if you don’t you just murder stuff by dissection. Instinct is a mixture of hunch, experience and common sense – and it works, as we make most of life’s major decisions the same way. It was done in a very funny way.

But that was just him talking. On the screen was a slide show of charts and graphs about how this fictional character called Lloyd analysed the more daily and mundane aspects of his life – which was a pointless exercise. But the charts were piss funny.

It was hard keeping up having to listen to him and read the screen but it worked well!

Finally we had Simon Waldman from Guardian Unlimited who trumpeted that we’re entering a great British era of media and that it’s the only thing this country is still really globally dominating.

Like BBC has 233m viewers of it’s news across all platforms; we are world leaders in TV formats; how top magazines titles are franchised globally; how the Economist podcast is in the top 10 on itunes; how the Tate will be a major media brand by 2012… and how the internet has helped us massively export our media creativity… and that we’re in a really good place, success is breeding success, etc. A very upbeat ending to the day.

But there could only be one winner of the overall battle – and after the final vote, GRAHAM FINK walked away with the crown of Biggest Thinker 2008 and also a really cool Mexican wrestling title belt as his prize.

Not a bad day out all round – not as good as 2006, which had a stellar line up (the likes of Trevor Beattie, Russell Davies, etc) – but pretty good.

However, even though digital was weaved in at times (as you’d expect), I was surprised there was no separate digital and mobile battle. And there was a bit too much heavy science.