marginally subversive

Screwed-up... and Sorry.

This is a very short entry from Seth Godin.

"You are right. I screwed up. I'm sorry."

It goes a long way.

Short.  Direct.  And relevant.

Does it really go a long way?  Perhaps not in the way that you would want it to go: screw-ups can get one fired.  Or castigated.  Or at least, memo'd and get one nasty day at work.

But it does go a long way.

You leave with your integrity intact by acknowledging that you're wrong - and you're responsible for being wrong - and that you're owning up to it.

A lot of people don't do these simple things anymore - and sometimes, I don't either.  We gloss it over, we rely on time to bury our mistakes, we BS and swing it...  We can claim we can't be faulted for doing so - "there are far more important things to do than dwell on it; besides, there are repercussions way beyond our current horizon... who knows?"

And yet, those very same reasons that we use to avoid these simple lines are the same reasons why we ought to own up to the responsibility:  there are far more important things than this - and there are repercussions that are yet to be seen.

Who knows, when we get to doing this, we actually get to rediscover our humanity.

Realizations on a Saturday dawn in the office...

Seth Godin writes a very timely and relevant article on the relationship between you - the hiree - and the company - the hirer.

In his blog entry, he writes of his experience: 

Years ago, when I had ten people working for me at my book packaging company, one client accounted for about half our revenue. They were difficult, constantly threatening litigation, sending lawyers to otherwise productive meetings, questioning our ethics and more. It was clearly the culture of their organization to be at war. So I fired them. I gave them the rights and walked away, even though it meant a huge hit to our organization. Why do it? Because if we had stuck with them, it would have changed who we were, who we hired and how we marketed ourselves going forward. We would have had a lifetime of this.

(Emphases mine.)

Lately, I have been trying to firm up a view that one should never "grovel" for a project, a job, or anything.  One should never beg.  It is something that has always been at the back of my mind as I try to do all the things that I need to do in my tasklist.  "Never grovel."

And Seth managed to capture in words why these words "Never grovel" have been stuck in my head: ... because when you grovel, you give someone else to define - and redefine - who you are.

There was a time - in another life - where we pitched for everything and anything that moved in the advertising world.  So long as they delivered the billings or landed us in the front page of the trade press and our rankings were improved, we did it.

We were pretty good at it: we were hitting 70-80%.

But after a long week and a long Friday night spent in the office, we were forced to take a step back and say, "Do we really want all these businesses?"

I looked around and there was my team: all eight of them. Hunched in front of their PCs at 1am.  Friday just past.  There were boxes of food on the common table.  And there were two more pitches to be reviewed and finished.  And it wasn't the first - it was the end of these kinds of days.  Tempers were short.  Emails were terse.  IM exchanges were 'measured' lest we 'shout' at each other digitally.

We were committed to excellence - to winning - to driving real, remarkable solutions to clients that would matter to their businesses.  And based on our success rate, we were doing great.

But is this really what we wanted?

Sure.  The mother-company would have wanted those red-colored numbers on the business P&L's to go away.  And we wanted that same thing.  We were aligned.

That's when we decided.

No more.

We were letting someone else - and something else - redefine who we were.  It wasn't magical - but it was close.  I packed up, turned up the volume of my PC to max, and shut it down.  The all-too-unique/common 'exiting' music from Windows reververated in the room.  Everybody looked up.

And then everybody did the same thing.

We never should grovel.  We never should beg.

We never should demean our humanity just because somebody else wants us to meet their expectations  - "lest you get fired".

(And as I write this, I recall MARKETING Singapore's cover story for the month of October: "The Pitch is the Bitch".)

John Baldoni writes in the Harvard Business Publishing blogs about Mr. Colin Powell's decision to endorse Barack Obama - something which probably took a lot of Americans by surprise (pleasantly or otherwise).

Mr. Baldoni says that

Powell used all of his persuasive skills to describe the context and the reasons for his decisions. Studying that explanation can serve as a good template for explaining a decision clearly and forcefully. In essence, Powell acknowledged the enormity of the issues as well as the reasons for his advocacy.

And that how Mr. Powell laid down his reasoning for this presumably tough, political, and potentially career-limiting move for Mr. Powell is a great example of how leaders can arrive at decisions particularly during tough times.

Mr. Baldoni's observations are as follows:

Provide the big picture.
Make the case.
Declare the moral imperative.
Look to the future.

I think that leaders and managers ought to heed and remember these 'tips'.

Andrew Lahde's Towel on the Floor

This has got to be one of the best resignation letters I have ever read.  I  don’t know Andrew Lahde - unfortunately.  Apart from the things that have been written of him (he of the magnificent returns, he of the Lahde Capital phenomenon).  But some parts of his letters resonate with me. 

Some, I don't agree with.  Some, I strongly agree.

Here's his 'good-riddance, f-ing goodbye y'all' letter...

Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.

Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, “What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it.” I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.

There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.

I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.  (Emphasis mine.)

…

I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life — where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management — with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.

On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man’s interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft’s near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.

Lest we start thinking of Lahde as a saint - and I believe he has no intention of being one - here's one commenter, Dude,who posted an 'open response' to Lahde at Portfolio.Com:

Way to go, Andrew. It's good to see some honesty. What you didn't say is that you realized that you flipped ten heads in a row and you were smart enough not to try again. I'll share a reefer with you any day, even if I am one of those Ivy League rich boys who took a few of your best. Surely you understand delta hedging. We didn't lose as much as you think since we hedge everything but a "transaction spread." It's the widows and orphans that funded your riches, not us.

               

You be the judge of this -

OK.  This is bad.

But one must admit:

It is funny
It is innovative use of different sizes of media
It has a story
It's pretty remarkable
And oh well...

You get the drift.

sorry, really so sorry... but

I really find these ads amusing...  shallow Phil.

And this.  This is so wrong on so many levels.  And funny.

And it just doesn't work on Sarah Palin videos - it works on this, too!

Hulu, SNL and Sarah Palin - Finally!

I have been trying out HULU for the past several days - and I couldn't get it to run because - well, I am not based in the US.  But today seemed to be different: I was able to watch these two videos of SNL's featuring VP candidate, Sarah Palin.

To be honest, more interested in the access granted by HULU (and SNL) more than the content of the video.  But oh well.  It was fun watching it - and I would say, a great PR move for Sarah Palin after all the criticisms that I have read of her.  (OK - I am in no position to comment because I don't really follow US politics that much... though I know it would impact all the markets I am following.  Oh well.)

Here're the videos - watch them before HULU - and NBC - change their minds and get it off-air:

What's next, I wonder, from Hulu?  Are they finally going to go global?  Dudes, you should!  There's gotta be a way for Hulu to make money out of this.

Here's a discussion of the implications from Silicon Alley Insider.

what is social media?

Here's a slideshare.net deck that I found interesting about social media.

I still hold to the belief though that social media is nothing new: it's always been there.  It's just that, we see its effects more now because people are empowered by the internet to communicate and connect with others more easily.

Social Media

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: networking network)

Thoughts on Outdoor

EyeCorp contacted me in August to give some viewpoints on outdoor advertising.  I would like to share what I have in response to the questions that they have fielded through to me:

Q: What do you consider the biggest challenge for the OOH sector in 2008?

A: There are a number of challenges in the OOH sector in 2008 and the years to come.  The most immediate one, however, is perhaps the slowing down of the ad marketplace due to the prevailing uncertainties in the business scene.  It is not entirely unique to the OOH sector, but also affects the different sectors in the media planning and buying industries.

There appears to be a growing global consensus that major economies are slowing down.  This has a trickle-down effect on the sentiments of marketeers in terms of the budgets that they are willing to spend on advertising and marketing communications.

This slowdown could also affect the way marketeers see their budgets:  with a similar – if not lower – media and advertising budget, and consequently, OOH budgets, there is a greater demand for accountability and ensuring that all media in the communications mix do perform and deliver in creating value for their target consumers and their business’ bottom-line.

The demand for more accountable media and marketing solutions, we believe, will be significantly higher given these demanding times – and no medium will be immune to these emergent trends in the marketplace in Singapore, in Asia Pacific, and globally.

Q: What do you see as the greatest opportunity for the OOH sector in 2008 and beyond?
Q: How important is measurement for OOH in your country?

A: The greatest opportunity for the OOH sector is in demonstrating accountability, measurability, and ROI.

Being able to demonstrate these to clients will be one of the greatest opportunities for the OOH sector in 2008 and beyond.  In these rather ‘troubled times’ where marketing budgets will need to work harder to achieve more or the same with less dollars, OOH stands at a very good time to demonstrate its ability to deliver on campaign goals and ultimately, to contribute to the clients’ bottom-line.  It is – admittedly – an opportunity and simultaneously, a challenge.

Accountability and ROI have been core themes in the area of communications planning and implementation in the past several years.  However, the current business scenarios that we are facing require that OOH – and other media – look at accountability, ROI, and measurability more carefully. 

Every aspect of the communications planning process – from designing the communications mix that will include advertising, PR, CRM, and other marketing disciplines, down to the selection of specific vehicles and activations – will need to be measurable, accountable, and focused on contributing to the entire campaign and to the creation of value to the business.

Measurability, therefore, is very important.  Measurability encompasses the different stages of the planning and implementation cycle of the communications campaign.  Ultimately, OOH players must be able to demonstrate (1) that there is a science and a discipline that could empower and guide planners and clients in deciding which OOH vehicles are best positioned to deliver against communications and business objectives, and (2) that ultimately, OOH vehicles do deliver.

Q: OOH has experienced continuous growth globally over the last five years; can you nominate some of the key reasons why?

A: All these were driven – I believe – by consumers being far more curious and knowledge-empowered than ever before, and by clients and agencies’ realization that consumers are not so easy to convince given this strengthened curiosity and hunger for information.

Back then, the all-encompassing campaign objective was to “generate awareness” or “maintain recall”.  These days, the tasks of communications planners are far wider than ever before: help create value to consumers, help create value to the business and its shareholders. 

OOH is in a very unique position in that it covers the “last-mile” of the consumers’ journey towards a purchase of a brand – and in fact, to the very last minute prior to the purchase.  This characteristic of the outdoor medium has contributed significantly to its growth and development as a medium.

Also, the OOH industry has been more resilient in keeping up with technological developments.  For example, some OOH companies have started venturing into outdoor-media solutions that bridge the gap between exposure and response through Bluetooth® or mobile-messaging technologies.  Some OOH companies have also started venturing into location-based and ‘lifestyle-based’ targeting.

Q: What are the prospects of OOH in the future?

A:  We are facing some significant challenges in the near-term.  How local economies will respond to the slowdown in the US and in other major economies remains to be seen.  Hence it will be difficult to say whether OOH will continue to grow or stall or decline.

One thing is for sure, however:  So long as the OOH industry continues to be abreast with the evolving needs of marketeers and businesses in providing accountable solutions, we think that it has a good chance of emerging relatively unscathed.