the art of conversation

Big Ad campaign

I love flying and I’ve flown quite a lot recently, everyone from Etihad to Easyjet. (More Easyjet unfortunately). Domestic and short-haul flights used to be BA every time. It felt homely, good service, reasonable food, not treated like an inconvenient idiot. 

So I ought to have liked BA’s recent Big Ad campaign, said to have cost £20m, from BBH who make excellent ads. A return to form, a confident, forward-looking statement of intent?

Instead I saw a sluggish, sycophantic, hollow piece of hubris. It is intended to be nostalgic but it just felt dated. It’s meant to be about customer service, it comes across as almost entirely self-obsessed. It’s meant to build up to a crescendo, to take off (quite literally, see what they did there?) with the lines, ‘Speedbird 1, cleared for take off’ but emotionally it’s about as flat as a muddy field near a runway.

 The transcript is helpfully given on YouTube, but comments are disabled. I wonder why? So we can appreciate lines like: “those next young men, travelling further, faster, higher … who skimmed the edge of space, the edge of heaven, the edge of dreams.”

And for some reason the client seems to think that showing lots of aircraft (from different eras) flying together will make viewers' hearts sing, rather than make them think of mid-air collisions.

The main thing for me was how out of touch it felt: with the times, with the idea of service (ironically). It felt to me as if it had been written by BA’s public relations department, rather than one of the most respected and creative (ahem) agencies around.

I can understand why some current and former employees love it. (Strikes notwithstanding). I can imagine that the client is very happy with it. But customers?

You’d think the motto / endline was, To fly. To self-serve.

We play our games and the sky goes on

I was on the road last week, around Birmingham and Manchester, talking to people about money and bank accounts and the like.

Two things occurred to me, both quite obvious things I suppose.

The first thing is that, doing research 'out there' where people live is probably something we should all do more often.

The places where we often talk to people in a research context condition what we learn.

The second thing is that, when you build in a little 'dwelling time', you notice more and learn more.

If you look around less familiar places you can see how people are being affected by the downturn.

Income inequality has never been greater.

A friend told me this staggering stat yesterday. The wealthiest 400 individuals in America have more money than the poorest 140 million.

It pays to take the time to look around.

As I say, obvious, really.

Men, cars and sheds: live your dreams

It's a funny old world. As they say.

Don't they also say, it's a man's world?

I've been thinking about funny old men this week. First I went to see a company that makes £100k performance cars. Then I went to talk to men about woodstain, sheds and things like that.

Men are notoriously reluctant to 'open up' and talk about their dreams, about what really matters to them in their life.

It is easy to get sidetracked by surface distractions.

Like cars and sheds.

But you can get glimpses into the deeper stuff, if you are lucky or approach it in the right way.

I hope that we get to study men and expensive cars.

Our method is to revisit the excellent 'From A to B tales of modern motoring' by Nicholas Barker/Martin Parr.

You should really try and get the book, or better still watch the series.

Alternatively, we shall concentrate on sheds.

Glorious in their own, deeply misunderstood kind of way.

pic by Beedle Um Bum

On the buses

We’ve been doing some behavioural research for Greener Journeys, exploring people’s habits and experiences around bus travel.

Our research informed their report, 'A step change for Britain’s buses: Maximising the economic, social and environmental potential', launched at the House of Commons yesterday.

It’s odd, buses are at the same time very familiar to us, yet rather overlooked, almost invisible to everyone except regular users. This applies to the public and also (I suspect) to politicians and business leaders.

Arguably we ought to be championing buses more, as they are obviously more eco-friendly than private cars (at least when reasonably full), they are cheaper and more flexible than trains and they also represent the ultimate in local, community transport. As ‘localism’ these days is all the rage (Big Society etc) why are buses so far down the political agenda?

Greener Journeys is a bus industry initiative trying to change this, to get buses noticed and taken more seriously within the legislature. And no, the Reg Varney image is not helping to modernise the image of the bus, but possibly does speak to the local community aspect. Interesting that the bus was used as a London Olympics icon.

Both of these examples are London and London is atypcial in relation to buses and so much else. We researched how the bus is used and seen amongst car-owning households outside London: what were the triggers and barriers which would encourage and hinder greater use of the bus?

We spoke to people at home, took a journey with them by bus that they would normally make by car, then invited them to reflect on their experiences and behaviour. (We call this method ‘co-discovery’).

We produced a report and made a film of the whole exercise, hopefully to be linked to here soon. Key highlights are:

• transport choices are habitual and the car is a hard habit to break, with many ‘short cuts’ which keep the car top of mind
• people who don’t use the bus rarely consider doing this (availability bias) and have forgotten some basic ‘bus habits’
• all too often the cost of going by bus and the ‘pain of paying’ count against buses
• buses have something of an image problem
• but the reality is better than the perception, buses are not nearly as bad as some people expect (although not as good as they want)
• and there are some unexpected rewards and benefits from going by bus

Visual communications

I can't remember where I found this fire poster, but I like it.

'OMG I'm on fire LOL'

It wouldn't have been in China, which I visited for the first time recently and where Twitter is banned.

Funny how paranoia soon sets in.

Not as funny as the poster below, found on innocent's blog.

Very postmodern. Or possibly not.

Loving the 'unbelievably'.

36 hours in Jakarta

On a business trip last week I asked the taxi driver to take me on a little tour on the way to the airport. 

Two things struck me:

1. I shall never complain about London traffic again having seen Shanghai then Jakarta *

2. How alike and yet how unalike we all are, citizens of these great cities of the world

 

* I may or may not stick to this

Reflections on the Insight Show

We enjoyed it, at least between set up and pack down.

If you've never been, Marketing Week Live is a massive marketing services exhibition at Olympia (data marketing, in-store, online and Insight).

At times, it's a bit like Dante's Inferno, with merchandise.

It's so overwhelming and noisy with so much going on that the whole experience is quite exhausting.

But there are not many times you can have lots of conversations with clients and potential clients under one (very large) roof. Or listen to talks by the Head of Marketing for Man Utd or the MD of Google, UK and Ireland.

(Sorry, I mean have 'an amazing opportunity to hear from leading global brands, interact, debate, question and network with truly inspiring marketing minds'. Marketing, remember)

More positives were that Judith and Lisa's talk on using trance techniques generated lots of interest, as did Siamack's new ethnographic app, EthOS.

Our insight cakes went down a storm (a fresh insight in every cake), every single one eaten.

Fortunately, we have the recipe for insight cakes, so if you want a supply of fresh insights, get in touch.

It was also great to catch up with friends and colleagues to share experiences and compare levels of exhaustion.

Glad to have done it, glad it's over.

 

Insight found in Olympia, shock

Forget anything you may have heard about insights. Including by us.

We can exclusively reveal that real, live insights can now be found, for two days only, in one small part of a  very large hall in west London.

The Insight Show is back and we are going to be there, at Stand D067, right next to the Quadrangle.

'We' is the whole family: Wardle McLean, Propeller, EverydayLives and EthOS.

That little baby is worth checking out, btw.

So come by and see how many insights you can carry away with you.

And if you're lucky and quick off the mark, you could even get to take Siamack for a chelo kebab.

Time for good ideas

Bizarre. I’d passed this poster a few times and assumed it to be a warning about pollution, leaks or the perils of (corroding) oil pipelines: the picture all gloomy and menacing, the headline with the problem, URL for the answer.

There was even a fake oil company name, Statoil (State Oil, as in Big Oil?). Why had Greenpeace or FoE not put their logo on it, though?

The reason (obvious now) is that it is an ad for Statoil, the Norwegian energy company. The most recent 'good idea' on the site seemed to be that King Harald V of Norway visited the Statoil stand on the opening day of the ONS show in Stavanger.

I clicked on ‘deep dives’ (see what they did there?) to find out that “gas is delivered directly to UK shores through an extensive pipeline system”.

Then even further into the site, “the main limitations for future oil supply are not below the ground, but in our heads … There’s never been a better time for good ideas”.

On the subject of not such a good idea, is this even bizarrer ad for blackcurrant Lucozade.

(Thanks to Simon for the spot.)

I know it's aimed at people younger than me and this is a rather reactionary point, but ... it's hard not to think that it tastes so disgusting that you want to spit it out.

'There's a word for it ... yeeuuurrgghh!'

Oh and that it is full of colourings.

A shame, because the Lucozade 'yes' campaign, especially the films of cool people roller blading somewhere Californian are really good.

Which all goes to prove … it’s not as easy as you might think, this communication malarkey.

In search of insight

Philosophy has been compared to ‘a blind man looking for a black cat in a dark room … which is not there’.

You could substitute ‘insight’ for philosophy. Insight is such a key ‘thing’ in research and marketing these days, that we are all looking for it and yet it is very hard to find.

The reason is that we are looking in the wrong place - for the wrong thing. To explain ... 

I went to an AURA debate at the RAF Club, Piccadilly recently (co-sponsor, AQR). The debate was headlined ‘who killed insight’? 

The RAF Club is a fantastic place, incidentally, where pint glasses have handles and men have striped ties and double vented blazers. And moustaches. For some reason, my mind drifted to David McCallum as the Invisible Man, apparently a 1970s TV series.

What if Insight (as a person) were a master of disguise, turning up as someone different in different places? Insight is only visible when it is ‘dressed appropriately’ according to the occasion and the company and the job in hand?

The debate consisted of four short talks from Christene McCauley, Global Consumer Planning Director of Diageo, Sinead Jeffries of Opinion Leader, Kathy Ellison, Head of Customer and Market Insight at Ecclesiastical and Rosie Campbell of Campbell Keegan.

My main takeaways from this most enjoyable session were that:

1. Insight moves invisibly among us, loyal to nobody; it is not dead but there are serial attempts to kidnap it, often in a white van marked ‘client property’
2. We should get to know our clients’ businesses better and trust our instincts more, if we are to befriend Insight more often
3. More events like this debate would help, otherwise the cultural divide between client and agency could widen and we and Insight could become further estranged

But something was still bothering me. Something was not quite right. Could it be an insight …?

Obviously Insight is not a person. But neither is insight a ‘thing’. It’s a process. You might say that there is no such thing as ‘an insight’. There is only ‘insightful’.

This is not a new thought. The idea was discussed in the 2007 ESOMAR paper by Wendy Gordon and Nitasha Kapoor of Acacia Avenue. They quote Jeremy Bullmore who says “it is not the ‘what’ of insight but the ‘how’ that makes it valuable.”

Something which is insightful in a high potency way has an immediate clarity and call to action about it; a ‘guiding idea that excites and inspires’. Something truly insightful will get passed on, remembered and acted on, whereas a mere ‘insight’ will stay ‘stuck’ in a document as the property of the originator. 

So, Insight, unmasked at last. Not a person, not a thing. Not even a cat. 

But available to all of us, if we work hard enough.

Nila Watch 4

Collecting is a sign of great intelligence, I think I read somewhere, once.

We are collecting Nila van advertising executions. Nila, the food distribution service, radically changed their advertising strategy in response (quite possibly) to our blog. They used to use innuendo and semi-nudity, until we exposed them. You can read the amazing story here and here.

In the latest dramatic twist, we saw this van yesterday at BBC headquarters, White City. They could be on the point of securing a TV series, based on the new trend for 'cringe comedy' (latest example, the excellent 2012).

Alternatively, they could have been delivering some extra large hamburgers. The image could be an oblique reference to the Gary Larson/B Kliban cartoon captioned 'never eat anything bigger than your head'.

But it's probably even subtler than that. And it's not about burgers. The woman is conspiring with us, as if to keep a secret. But who is the food for? Is it for her or is she delivering it, but to whom? Note how she holds the plate. Notice her forefinger, not just shooshing, but pointing. The lucky recipient? The angle of the plate suggests she is about the throw it away, to focus on her real mission. The tilt of the head and cheeky grin is designed to encourage a man to think that if he asked for a chip, she would give him one.

This is surely Nila returning to its core theme of seduction, with food on the side, which could upset people. A risque strategy, you might say.

We will have to wait for the TV series to find out what happens next.

Conversation as behaviour

 

"Conversation is a meeting of minds. It doesn’t just exchange facts but transforms them … doesn't just reshuffle the cards, it creates new cards."  Theodore Zeldin

I've been thinking a lot about Behavioural Economics lately. Hasn't everyone...?

It occurs to me that conversations, or at least some conversations, are a creative act; an act (ie behaviour) which creates/conditions other behaviour.

'Messages' and conversations

"Markets are conversations … there is no demand for messages, there is a tremendous demand for good conversation."

From the Cluetrain Manifesto circa 1999.

Old hat, some might say.

But if the old hat fits, wear it.

Time for a new narrative in advertising research

Life used to be so much simpler.

You work on Madison Avenue, smoke and drink all the time and treat clients and women with equal contempt.

At least on Mad Men.

The reality of life in adland nowadays is much tougher: more media, more brands, more advertising, more cynical consumers.

It is hard to create truly original, impactful advertising ideas. And just as hard to research them.

All you can do is try to work closely with the team in the best interests of the brand.

So it’s galling when divisive old stereotypes from bygone eras are trotted out, usually along the lines of ‘Shortsighted Research bludgeons Genius Creative Idea’. And the example almost always chosen is the Myth of Those Great Heineken Ads.

Persuasive people have dined out on the story so often that it has stuck. It goes like this: agency creates brilliant and original advertising idea (‘Refreshes the Parts’), research says ‘don’t do it’, but brave client sticks by agency and campaign goes on to be massively successful for the brand.

This story is gleefully used as a stick to beat research with, so a while ago we decided to investigate.

Here’s a write-up and some charts. (Warning, contains research which threatens your creativity).

In summary:

• the first piece of (now infamous) research did call it wrong, but more research a few months later found the ads clever, amusing and impactful, but questioned longer-term brand equity, rather presciently as it turned out
• sales of all lager brands went up massively over the following two very hot summers but Heineken did not increase its market share
• in fact, the longer the campaign continued, the more negative brand equity was reinforced, until the brand was withdrawn from the market altogether

So research was blamed for trying to kill a campaign (except it didn’t) which became a massive success (except it didn’t). Cold-filtered Heineken joined the ranks of failed beer brands (Hofmeister, Skol) while some of its competitors thrive (Fosters, Carling).

The blame game undermines everyone. Not all creative ideas are genius, not all research is short-sighted, not all clients are timid (another brickbat often lobbed out). These days good communications require more of a team effort.

So it’s refreshing when a Young Turk like Tony Quinn, JWT Planning Director, says that planning needs to  embrace collective skills like curiosity and problem-solving, to be more humble and open to worlds beyond its own boundaries, because sharing is ultimately more rewarding than being right.  

‘ditch the cynicism, the undermining, the poking and the ranting, and  rechannel all that energy into a new attitude of sharing and collective inspiration’

The new generation of planners take a much more collaborative and inclusive approach and draw on sources like observation, immersion, semiotics, ethnography, analytics (research, in other words) because they know that great ideas and good thinking are not incompatible.

So, farewell divisive Heineken advertising myth, hello generous planning 2.0 and more effective communication.

So elegant yet so cheesy

Cheesy ad of the year so far has to be this 'Dolca Vita' offer from Longines: all-star cast, one celeb per continent, nothing story, plonky product placement ... but does it matter? You decide. We can't.

New bagel ad

We had a hand in this, so to speak.

We think it's come out rather well. Very ... bagel-y. Hope you agree.

Great British advertising

Another year starts, time to consider the cream of last year's crop of UK advertising. Is it more creative, innovative and mould-breaking than ever before? Not judging by Neilsen's list of the 5 most popular ad campaigns of last year:

1. CompareTheMarket.com: meerkats fighting an army of mongooses in a snowy landscape

2. Magner's Irish Cider: Clonmel home of Magners Cider; lorry over golf course; through brick wall

3. Maltesers: Two couples watch a movie; girlfriends position boyfriends so that they are cuddling

4. Santander: Family driving in car; boy falls asleep with red legos; featuring Lewis Hamilton

5. Snickers: Mr. T doing pushups; listen up, suckers; get tough, one-fingered push-ups

THE hit of last year was of course Aleksandre the meerkat. We had the lo-ong prequels to the original ads (Aleksandre's story); then the book was a massive Christmas hit and now there are out-takes from the prequel of the spin-off of the ads.

So there is a lot of talk about creativity at all costs and innovation and breaking the mould and we've had great ads like drumming gorillas and dancing flashmobs and the like. Meanwhile this poster has just appeared up the road from us.

Happy new year!

Impressions of Moscow

My image of Moscow came from Spitting Image, James Bond and current affairs (Litvinenko, corruption allegations, FIFA). What is it really like? It was my first visit and I had only 29 hours to find out.

Domodedovo airport, at 4.45am is minus 15 degrees C. Business as usual. It  reaches minus 20 to minus 25C. They can do cold here. I take a coach to avoid airport taxi hounds and reach the Metro by 6am, joining drab half asleep commuters. It seems like it is snowing inside the carriage (did I imagine it?). I miss Paveletsky station, due to unfamiliar writing and general lack of signage (and sleep). 

Above ground, lots of people scurrying around, hunched over. Is it just the cold, or is everyone here in a bit of a hurry? Workers sweep away the ice and frost with long reed brushes - surprisingly effective.

More by luck than judgement I find my hotel (highly recommended btw). The windows are triple glazed.

  Off to groups via (overpriced) taxi. So much traffic! It takes nearly an hour on an 8-lane highway, going not that far. Cab weaves in an out, driver mutters as blue-sirened darkened-glass 4x4s sweep through. Every so often we crawl past an amazing building or vista.

Over dinner I learn that Russians like Brits and Italians more than Poles, that vodka is in fact very drinkable, that Moscow's population is nearer 12.5m than 10.5m (Wikipedia), due to migrants. Angry demo against non-Slavs the day before. Foreign Office advises non-white Brits to be vigilant here. Not a place for the faint-hearted.

The next morning, again stuck in traffic, only half an hour in Red Square, strange clash of Soviet era and commercialism, too cold to take many pictures. Back to Domodedovo on the express train.

A fleeting visit, some of my stereotypes persisted. Moscow is vast, fast, hard-working and rather surly. They can certainly cope with snow and cold. They have embraced capitalism wholesale. The traffic's appalling, the Metro's very good.

I'd love to come back and have a proper look.

Preferably in the summer.

Brand interest vs my interest: exploring shades of corporate symbiosis

We’ve been working with a High St bank and with a large charity. There is an ‘interest dimension’ operating, from those companies felt to act exclusively in their own interests, to the detriment of others (eg debt collectors?) to those who act exclusively in others’ interests (eg a church mission?).

Of course most organisations operate in the middle, acting in their own interests (necessary for survival, of course) and in the interests of key stakeholders, such as consumers. Our theory is that the perceived 'interest balance' of organisations, the extent to which they are seen to value and to act in our (consumers') interests, is increasingly important. Brands must get the symbiotic balance right.

There are perceptual degrees of difference which echo those of biology. In a parasitic relationship, one member of the association benefits while the other is harmed. Then there are different kinds of symbiotic relationships, which ‘lean’ one way or the other. Amensalism is a relationship where one species is inhibited while the other gains. Commensalism is where one benefits and the other is not significantly harmed or helped. Mutualism is the relationship where both parties derive a benefit.

In nature and in the commercial world there are no examples of a species acting in the interests of another species to its own detriment, but the middle area is the key battle ground for hearts and minds. The clear message from our work is that people are happy for an organisation to benefit from their custom as long as (a) the benefit to the organisation is reasonable and visible and (b) they personally benefit at least as much.

Local graffiti conversation

The small print reads, 'because it's better than being a miserable pr*ck'

In praise of ... You are the big picture

Just noticed a stunning new campaign from AMV.BBDO, one of our favourite ad agencies. It’s big, it’s modern, it’s bang on the money. And it’s yellow.

Aviva is projecting giant portraits of its customers on to landmark buildings in six cites around the world – seen here on South Bank in London.

The activity supports a press campaign that tells stories of how customers were helped by Aviva. People can upload their own photograph.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the first 250,000 photos uploaded by the public, Aviva will donate £1 per image to Save the Children.

A short film is then generated for each user uploading their picture, they can then download or share their personalised film.



IMHO it is a genius idea because it is very noticeable but very unobjectionable, and because:
-    it is co-creative, genuinely involves real people
-    it humanises a large multinational company
-    it translates well across borders – a very international idea
-    works across media, TV, online and (especially) outdoor, very much advertising in the real world
-    insurance is not the most inherently fascinating subject, but people are

Well done to all those concerned!

Seven Days vs Paralympics on Channel 4

I loved Big Brother when it started, so I couldn't wait to see the first episode of Channel 4's new reality show Seven Days before going on holiday.

I was very impressed (technically superb, fantastic concept) but, I'm sorry to say, not that interested or intrigued.

C4 call it "a docu-soap ... a new kind of documentary series in which viewers can follow the lives of a variety of compelling characters as they actually happen." 

Maybe I just wasn't interested enough in the characters (compelling??), who seemed too interested in themselves to be interesting to anyone else (eg models Laura and Samantha, as opposed to Javan and Moktar). I had the nagging feeling that it was closer to Richard Curtis' vision of Notting Hill than the real Notting Hill. Couldn't it have been set in Dalston or Camberwell? And how 'real' is it meant to be, anyway?

I read some media comments as I contemplated catching up on 4oD. It seems I'm not the only one with misgivings. Viewing figures have apparently dropped from around 1.2 million for the first programme, to 646,200 in week 3, according to the Independent.

One viewer commented "the only guy who gets any credit in my eyes is Moktar and I wish him well in his legal studies. Channel 4 stop wasting our money! Times are tough and we can do without this".

C4 does have some public service broadcasting commitments but is commercially funded. Its Director of Sales described it recently as being about "irreverence, the new and fun; self deprecating and challenging the status quo. Inspiring change and being maverick". None of which seem to me to apply to Seven Days from a content point of view (as opposed to the concept/format), although it's early days.

And these values do apply to C4's Paralympic coverage, which sounds much more genuinely innovative and interesting.

Having researched the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games and with the Commonwealth Games now on TV, I am far more intrigued in the lives and efforts of athletes than I ever was. 

C4 launched its Paralympic coverage recently with 'Freaks of Nature' and is planning more documentaries including 'Inside Incredible Athletes', profiling seven athletes and a 10-part documentary series, 'Hidden Heroes'.

I feel more interested in watching someone I probably have far less in common with than a Notting Hill resident suffering from 'fashion stress'. Whether this makes me traditional or edgy, I'm not sure.

Talking is useless. Discuss. Or rather, don't.

Research-Live.com recently reviewed 'Consumer.ology' by one Philip Graves. It's a balanced review, considering the line advanced by Graves (ex client-side researcher) is about as dumb and unoriginal as Rambo 12. The 'argument' is, because what people say does not correspond to what they do (hold the front page of Research, Marc) there's no point talking or even listening to them. Just watch what they do. 

This blinding insight apparently happened after the author finished bombarding some poor sods in Leeds with questions in a focus group. After he turned his tape recorder off they started having a proper conversation and talked about doing something different to what they'd told their interrogator. He used this as evidence that talk was deceptive, rather than that he might be a shit moderator. 

Unhindered by any such doubts, he went on to discover that people do psychoanalysis but still can't get to the bottom of their own thoughts and that our emotions shape our decisions, therefore we cannot identify what we want and don't want. (I can however identify with 100% accuracy one recently published book I will not buy.)

He says it is an illusion that we can ask people what they think and learn from it. I re-read that particular gem a couple of times to check I wasn't mistaken, but that is what it says. There goes journalism, then.

Torrid Tale of Two Beers

Our thoughts turn to beer, it must be Friday afternoon.

Steve Henry this week bemoaned the lack of creativity in Budweiser’s latest poster: “a corporate-guideliney visual” which demostrates that "‘selling’ doesn't sell. You have to stand out and you have to entertain.”

Creative it's not. But it does convey that it's a new beer that's 4% and less fizzy. Beer drinkers probably like the idea of a smoother lager (doesn't 'bag you up') and maybe know that 4 is the new 5 in ABV terms.

If you want creativity and entertainment, you might think Guinness was unbeatable. They have a new campaign out. It's such a shame.

Guinness ads used to be the best anywhere; creative, impactful and (surely) helping sales. Now they seem to have disappeared up their own black stuff. Their current ‘bring it to life’ campaign includes yet another epic, budget-busting production described as a ‘good point lost in lavish invention’. Wonderful to watch, but oddly forgettable and disconnected to anything.

Guinness ads used to tell terrific, watchable, enrolling stories, like Jonathan Glazer's Swim Black and of course the award-winning Surfer. But maybe these awards went to their head because then they abandoned narrative in favour of symbolism and spectacle. Which would be all very irrelevant had UK sales of Guinness not fallen by seven million pints in the last year or so.

BRANDED! WHAT'S IN A NAME?

We market researchers spend many hours exploring and analysing brands. We fill in Brand Pyramids, Brand Keys and Brand Onions until our eyes water. We appreciate the value of a memorable, evocative brand name.

So if you look down a list of market research companies you would expect to be impressed. In fact there is a real mix. There are the big companies with Anonymous Initials like GfK, TNS etc; there are Corporate Speak names (eg Synovate) which presumably sound reassuring. Then there are the more creative options, like animals and food (Flamingo, Aardvark, Spinach, Sherbert) and the more attention-seeking (Voodoo, Firefish, Captain Crikey, Ftang Ftang Biscuit Barrel and so on). 

Then there is the smaller company that uses founders' surnames AND an animal logo - genius!

What can you tell about a research company from its name? Is it like fashion, the more interesting the clothes the less interesting the person? Big Anonymous Initials and Corporate Speak must reflect caution, protecting the value of your reputation. Others maybe learnt from the internet gold rush, aiming to attract attention and names like Google and Yahoo! got you noticed.

I think new research companies could learn a lot from yacht names. One adman famously called his yacht Severence after how he paid for it. Yacht names would make good research company names: Serendipity, Integrity etc. There is a yacht-y belief that vowels in yacht names bring good luck (because vowels float but consonants sink?) So choose the right name for your research company and you'll stay afloat. Worth knowing, that.

Dominic

Some Alternative London Cycling

Still on the topic of cycling in London, news just in that bike polo is vying for recognition as an official Olympic Sport. Apparently, it was an Olympic sport up until 1908.

 

The London Bike Polo League have numerous courts  around the capital and invite newbies to join in - you don't even need to bring your own club. According to the BBC, the key rules are:

• two teams of three players
• players must not touch the ground
• no throwing of mallets
• only player-to-player contact is allowed
• goals can only be scored with the end of the mallet
• your bike must have at least 'one working brake'.

Boris, bikes and Barclays branding

TfL’s new bicycle hire scheme for London launched today, endorsed by Mayor Boris, proclaiming: 

Londoners have awoken to a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital … racks have been filled with thousands of gleaming machines that will transform our streets … My crusade for the capital to become the greatest cycling city in the world has taken a gigantic pedal-powered push forwards.

No pressure on the scheme, then.

Our local bike rack – sorry, Barclays bike rack – had one bike on it yesterday, 12 bikes this morning and 6 today. More than 12,450 keys have been handed out to Londoners enabling them to unlock bikes left at 315 docking points across the city. The cost of using the cycles varies from £1 for an hour to £50 for 24 hours. The bikes have no locks, which is said by TfL to be to deter people keeping them for long periods. I’d have thought 50 quid was disincentive enough.

Barclays has apparently paid £25m to sponsor the scheme and the Barclays cycle superhighway, a network of 12 cycle lanes, which is much more than some existing cycle lanes painted Barclays blue. Sounds like a good deal for them. And research has shown that (blue) is a good colour which stands out, says a TfL spokeswoman. 

Some people are upset that Barclays is too prominent as a sponsor and has encroached too much on to the civic/public domain. Cyclists as a group are not naturally big corporation lovers and there has of course been some creative ‘re-branding’.

At first sight there does seem to be a 'brand mash' of TfL, Oyster, Barclays, Boris (all blue), so it is hard to see who is doing what.

It will be interesting to follow the uptake and emerging views of the scheme.

I certainly hope it will be a great success and that lots more people will cycle in London as a result - even if comes to riding bikes 60 foot long. Not just on big, Barclays branded bikes. Bravo, Boris. Next up, Boris and the bendy bike?

How to BT the competition

This ad has been on posters and in the press everywhere (pic courtesy of Xtreme Information), part of a £30m campaign by BT to promote BT Vision carrying SS1 and SS2 from this Sunday. Apparently.  

OR, is it a covert ‘ambush’ campaign orchestrated by BSkyB to make BT look cheap and tacky? A much more successful ambush than Robbie Earl & Co’s World Cup Bavaria beer stunt.  

Could BSkyB have chosen four footballers with the least possible charisma, ordered their waxwork figures from Madame Tussauds, then photographed them to make them look like Star Trek extras who had just beamed down? The way they are staring off into space and those dodgy strips just give the game away.  

BSkyB would have been aiming to make BT look like amateurs and make their package seem like a pale imitation of the real thing.  

Even more surprising is how they must have managed to get AMV.BBDO involved. Clearly, a dastardly plan hatched at the highest level. Probably by a Chelsea fan.

Hopefully Wes and Michael will get their comeuppance on August 8.

Beach Reading

 It was David Ogilvy in Confessions of an Advertising Man who (roughly) said when on holiday read; but read something that's unrelated to work. Reading will keep the mind ticking over and give it space to de-clutter. 

Asking round the office, we've pulled together some beach reads we will be taking with us this summer to depressurise to some near and some far-flung climes. 

 If you're looking for American urban grit and a fan of The Wire (as quite a few of us are) then David Simon's Homicide and the Corner have come highly recommended. Although looking out to a sunbright sea may be more therapeutic.

 Wolf Hall, Man Booker Prize for 2009, has received mixed reviews by those who have already read it here.  Although giving us a pretty vivid picture of the early 16th Century England some have found it confusing to follow at times. Compared to Joyce's Ulysees though, it's a doddle.  

innocent agm film

Final edit of innocent agm film. Good people. A good day. Write-up here.

Inconveniently Green

Without wanting to sound too downbeat, being a 'green' consumer at the moment is inconvenient. It just doesn't pay. Our 'default' behaviour is to buy what we are used to, what is easy and affordable and what  benefits us - in spite of our good intentions. As Jane Austen wrote, "I have been selfish all my life, in practice, though not in principle".

And most companies of course are geared to deliver profit first and foremost, sustainability coming a distant second or third or lower down the list. And we are not mandated to behave differently by legislation, apart from a bit of recycling, perhaps. It is still just too convenient for us not to be 'green'. What will it take for our lifestyles to change?

These thoughts hit home having bought the Green Living Guide. Great efforts have been made in making 'green' actions more accessible and the guide itself is certainly praiseworthy if wanting to be 'green' is your thing. 

But there is some way to go for sustainable, low-carbon living to become more widespread in the UK . Perhaps because there are so many variables and imponderables, people just don't know what to do and are not motivated to take the lead. 

I think the key issue with communicating 'green' (without 'greenwashing') is there isn't enough 'in it' for the UK consumer, especially in the short-term. Solar panels, for example, require thousands of pounds and grant applications and just sound cumbersome and off-putting.

A Feast of Conversation

 

Theodore Zeldin, our hero and the author of  'An Intimate History of Humanity' and 'Conversation: how talk can change our lives', was interviewed on the Today programme on Friday to discuss his 'Feast of Conversation', held on July 3 at the Olympics site in a venue made from old shipping containers. 

Attendees chose from a menu of 25 conversation topics, and talked about what they find interesting. "It is for people who want to have two hours to think about what is important to them".

Professor Zeldin claimed that "we live in an age where we don't know what to talk about" hence his idea to "have a new kind of conversation where we are trying to discover what we think and to discover other people ... [which is] the most exciting adventure of our time ... to discover who inhabits the world". 

The professor bridled at the suggestion that his event was like speed dating. He felt it was the opposite of the inane babble of speed dating or something like Twitter (ahem) "...It is about thinking, not jabbering".

We look forward to reading the reviews.

Not on Twitter, though.

Insight Show 2010

 
We've been busy preparing for the Insight Show at the Grand Hall, Olympia, 29th and Wednesday 30th June, where we have a stand (D410, in fact). 

Here we are hard at work, setting up yesterday morning.

 

We're presenting two case studies under the title of 'Seeing is Believing, Latest Developments in Ethnographic Research', on Wednesday at noon in the Henley Suite.

The first study was with Virgin Trains who reveal the strategy behind their new ‘modal shift’ campaign. We demonstrate how filmed ‘co-discovery’ interviews deliver unique insight into the Virgin Trains passenger experience.

The second talk focuses on a new, ethnographic app Siamack has frequently blogged about. 

The edl APP is a brand new mobile phone application (iPhone and Blackberry), an innovative capture tool and a means of editing and collating real life events via video, pictures, audio and text. We discuss how it works in practice and why Coca-Cola are rolling it out globally as an in-house tool.

Both talks will be put on the Insight Show website some time soon, we shall link to this as and when.

In the meantime, if you can, do drop by stand D410 to say 'hello' and see what insights (and some surprises) we have on show.

Simon

Exclusive! World Cup Ad Shoot Out

The World Cup kicks off today (in case you hadn’t noticed). The advertising stakes are high, with Nestle courting controversy with Mars. 

How did the sportswear brands do? Adidas bagged the official sponsorship, Nike is the outsider (again). So, who won the advertising penalty shoot-out?

First up is Nike: 

The creative idea of sportsmen taking (or not taking) their chances may not be original (think Guinness, Believe) but that is a minor gripe. This 3-minute extravaganza took up the whole ad break and is breathless and highly re-watchable. It must have cost as much as its heroes' combined monthly salaries. So confident, such swagger, an amazing piece of film.

A shame that ITV managed to cut the ending the first time it aired. What a Nikemare. 

Our verdict: spectacular goal. Back of the onion bag. 

Then there's Adidas' effort:

It is contemporary, eye-grabbing, in a Sin City style. But as Rooney Carruthers writes in Campaign: "I've watched this ten times now and I still don't get it. Zinedine Zidane bombs about in a retro car. Lionel Messi and David Villa do some great foot tricks and that is it" 

Verdict: Fluffed it. Stuttering run-up, tried to be too clever then bobbled it straight at the keeper. 

So Nike is the clear winner and deserves to be - hang on a minute, a fan in an England shirt has just run on to the pitch and is about to take their own penalty...

It is not competing with Nike and Adidas in budget but we suspect it has every bit as much impact. As Jon Howard says, there's not an overpaid football star in sight. It's about us, not them. It uses the national anthem but it is not portentous or grandstanding. (It's possibly not as re-watchable, either.) It's a penalty taken in slow motion. We watch, spellbound. The ball trickles over the line.

Verdict: an ad for the Age of Austerity. The excessive creative brilliance and money-no-object arrogance of Nike is going the way of Britpop or Lehman Brothers. The trouble with creative excess is for every Nike hit there are seven adidas flops. Or worse still, you get something like those Olympic mascots. 

This is toned down, scaled back, ever so Umbro.

And it gets our vote (some of us at least). 

So What?

‘So what?’ is the question that researchers are increasingly encouraged to ask of every chart in a presentation.

It’s a way of forcing your mind to go beyond reportage, ie not just to report what people say but what it means for the business. It’s a way of isolating findings which may be interesting but have no application, finding the most relevant points which really make a difference.

‘So what’ thinking used to be incorporated into research presentation charts as an output. The research findings would typically be in the top part of the chart, then the ‘so what’ or the implications or conclusion would run along the bottom, as the ‘bottom line’.

The latest extension of ‘So what?’ thinking is to put the conclusion in the headline. So a busy executive looking through the presentation on a screen can just read the headlines, the bottom line - now at the top.

Can you spot the flaw in this process?

The problem is that the researcher might leave out the more interesting implications. We may sacrifice quality and texture in the drive for answers and simplicity.

The researcher is now serving up 'convenience food'  instead of a gourmet meal where you can taste the individual ingredients.

The risk is that the client pays lip service to ‘consulting the consumer’ instead of actually listening and taking the feedback into account.

‘So what?’ is also the name of one of the most famous jazz tracks ever recorded on the ‘Kind of Blue’ album by Miles Davis. It’s brilliant, atmospheric, and highly emotional. It has no bottom line.

I know what you’re thinking: ‘So What?’

Dominic

 

Inside the innocent AGM

I spent last Saturday (sunny!) in a warehouse on an industrial estate off the Goldhawk Road. It was the innocent AGM and I wouldn’t have missed it for anything.

This was no ordinary AGM, despite featuring one quite interesting graph. But innocent is no ordinary company and their third 'grown up meeting' is quite hard to describe. Imagine a cross between a jamboree, a comedy gig, a hall test and a CBeebies awayday.

There were large bean bags to sit on and smoothies and veg pots to try (including new recipes, details of which we couldn’t possibly divulge for less than six figures). There were treasure hunts, talks, smoothie demos and games to play … all sorts.

Dan was the compere of the event and claimed to be its originator. He was a great host and was very funny (he writes innocent’s jokes). He also looked a bit like a pirate on a day off.

Innocent's three founders have been called hippies but they're too sussed for that. Plus, did you ever meet a hippie who played tennis, or worked for Bain and Co?

Mind you, innocent is quite beardy, especially the blokes - not only Dan, but Joe the good-looking one (tests prove it). Even Richard seemed a bit wispy on the day.

They say never trust a man with a beard but innocent admit to their mistakes. Like making a veg pot which was not suitable for vegetarians. Or sending supermarket buyers fermented fruit juice which exploded. Or getting into trouble for joking that one of their smoothies contained ‘two plump nuns’ when it didn’t.

Or forgetting in 2008/9 to ‘keep the main thing the main thing’, as sales dipped dramatically. Not helped by a global financial meltdown. 

WHAT'S A PICTURE WORTH?

In 2006 I went to South Africa to raise money for SOS Childrens Villages, the world's largest orphan charity. I'd just bought a Nikon D50 and hoped to sell some prints and donate any proceeds. 

I took pictures of children in an SOS orphanages and in nearby townships, including these ones:

.  

I was struck by how incredibly resilient and seemingly content the children were. Extreme poverty and hardship was usually portrayed as so downbeat, resigned, hopeless. I called the exhibition Child's Play. Original post here.

Then, nothing much happened. Except that my wife gave birth to a child of our own (nearly two-and-a-half now).

Until last week, out of the blue, I got a mail from someone representing a very large, global company who wanted to buy the rights to these images, for cash. All uses, in perpetuity.

I had to ask a professional photographer friend what this meant. I had never heard of a release form before this point, never mind had used them in South Africa.

But it made me think, what is the right thing to do? Take whatever money is offered and give it to the charity? Drive a hard bargain, negotiate on the rights and the cash offered, then pay the charity? Or should I try to ensure the individuals in the photos be recompensed financially? Or again, would they be thrilled just to know that they could become slightly famous and appear in the world's media?

The people who want to buy the images know that any payment would not go to me. But not having release forms is a bit of a problem for them. The kids could sue. The chance has probably passed.

Just a little story. Notice that I spared you the thousand words.

SHOCK HORROR ! FOCUS GROUPS IGNORED!

According to Tim Montgomerie's analysis of the Tory campaign:

'For a period, the 'Big Society' was put at the heart of the campaign. Amazingly, the Big Society was never tested in focus groups and it failed on the doorstep. One leading adviser to the campaign complained of a 'cavalier' approach to research. 'They latched on to research that backed their views and ignored any research that challenged it.'

Hmmm, the Big Society, also described by adliterate as an 'overcomplicated planning thought', seems to have been less than popular with the Tory faithful. They were probably asking the sort of questions people ask in groups such as 'What does it mean?' From David Cameron, the heir to Blair, it sounded like a Big Promise, to go in the Big Promise section of the manifesto, and to Sound Good, but without meaning anything that costs money. However as Kate Fox rightly pointed out in Watching the English, the national catchphrase is 'Come off it', so trying to put one over on the British is tricky at the best of times never mind at an election.

But I digress, this post is really about the use of focus groups in politics. Here is a respected right wing commentator complaining that policies were being put forward at an election without first being 'tested' in focus groups and without an impartial approach to research, which respects challenging findings. Halleluiah ! We researchers have come a long way since the dark days of Tony Blair when focus groups were seen as a left wing plot akin to witchcraft. One can argue with the word 'tested' but that's just a quibble really, the point is that politicians of whatever party now openly acknowledge that policy can be clarified and even improved by consulting 'real' people. Now, that is a step forward.

Dominic

NEUROSCEPTIC

The day after the General Election and the overall winner was the exit polls, which predicted the outcome with uncanny accuracy. Evidence of the enduring value of asking the right people the right question.

But if you’d gone to the annual research industry’s conference, Research2010, you’d have thought that asking people things was an outdated and frankly useless idea.

 As MRS Conferences go, Research2010 was Really Rather Good.  Hats off to co-chairs Simon Lidington and Nick Coates, not least for mentioning Roland Barthes in their introduction (that must have been a bet).

Trending strongly were co-creation, ethnography, online communities … and ‘brain stuff’.  The first three of these approaches build on what people say and are essentially generative or productive approaches.  All good stuff.  You try to learn from people-as-people, holistically.  There are no easy answers, interpretation is everything. 

But using fMRI scanners to show parts of people’s brains light up as they perform various tasks, is trying to replace what people say and is entirely reductive.  It treats people not as people, nor even as consumers, but just as lumps of grey matter. 

Presumably, brain scan advocates would exit poll by wiring up voters’ heads, to overcome the ‘limitations’ of verbal research techniques. Ethnographers would watch people while they queued then went into the private booth to vote. And co-creationists would invite voters to take part in a workshop, do some collage work and write about their experiences on a blog.

Instead, MR rivals GfK NOP / Ipsos MORI talked to people. (17,607 of them, working collaboratively with each other and with the broadcasters). 

The pain of election leaflets ...

 

I was woken at 6:15 this morning with my letterbox snapping loudly. Mistaking it for a knock on the door, I went to answer it only to find an election party leaflet asking me to vote for their party today.  

Mildly incensed to be awake so early, I added the leaflet to the ever-growing stack of political leaflets in my recycling bin and returned to bed.

Living in the Lewisham East constituency, this election has proven a battleground between Labour and the Lib Dems. Having predominantly been a Labour constituency since its formation in 1974, the current  Labour MP, Bridget Prentice, is standing down. With no incumbent candidate, this has meant the Lib Dems believe they have a real chance of getting a seat and both parties have been going hammer and tongs to get votes. 

Unfortunately, this has resulted in relentless leafleting (even at anti-social hours). And often they are the same leaflets as the week (or even day) before and end up being binned. 

Arguably, this does create excitement. There is a feeling of the political rumblings of 'change' happening on your doorstep. And from the parties' perspective, they will want to be getting clear, consistent and sustained messages to potential voters over the course of a campaign.

But the effect of repetitious (and somewhat intrusive) leafleting may be opposite to the one desired. For the overwhelmed electorate, feeling saturated by information and pestered by parties may discourage political engagement. 

At the next General Election, my vote would be for fewer, better timed communications, a more creative, considerate and voter-centered approach that encouraged a better conversation between party and electorate. And, hopefully, I'd then get a better sleep. 

Simon

P.S. some votes just in ...

Fancy a Cwoffee? Or a Tipple?

 

What's your poison? A Cwoffee or a Tipple?

Well, if you're looking for either, and for it to be related to work, then there are two events running that may be of interest.

'Cwoffee' at Lantana, Charlotte Place (just off Charlotte Street in AdLand) runs alternate Fridays. It is a meeting of Planners and Researchers over an early morning, piping cup of coffee. It's a chance to meet informally with other like-minded people, chat about  ideas on projects / initiatives; exchange blog IPs, Twitter IDs and business cards etc etc. Started by planner  Will Humphrey, it has been running for a year or so and attendees can drop in at any time between 8am until 10am.   

If early morning coffees don't suit, then an alternative event is happening during the evening. Aimed at mid-level and junior researchers (from all qualitative agencies), the aim is to share a drink (or more), but also to have a research focus on bettering qualitative thinking by  sharing / discussing examples of 'good qualitative thinking' (e.g. from articles, papers or personal experience).

The first meeting is in Roxy Bar, 6:30pm-8pm in London Bridge on Monday 10th May. It will be a kick-off  social event, whereby we get to know each other over a tipple and chat about what we want to get in detail from the following events. And that includes a name. Perhaps 'Tipple Tattle'...

So, drop me an email if you would like to come along to either at simonl@wardlemclean.co.uk (or just leave a comment below). 

Would be pleased to see you.

Simon

In Praise of ... Magners adverts

We've been impressed by the current Magners ad campaign, 'There's Method in the Magners'.

Developed by Red Brick Road, the campaign plays on the cider-making idiosyncrasies of the community of Clonmel, Tipperary, where founder 'Willie' Magner began making cider in 1935. The two TV ads, 'Straight' and 'Catch', are stories that have a 'quaint Gaelic charm' and a quirky odd-ball style. Kind of Father Ted meets Napoleon Dynamite meets Jack Daniel's.  The campaign even brought one viewer to tears who left the following comment on YouTube:

    "I just watched this on TV. Don't ask why but it made me cry. Such a beautiful ad ... and believe me, I don't go looking for adverts on YouTube just to compliment them"

This is a noticeable step from Magners 'Time Dedicated to You' advertising where the current campaign positions the brand as different and premium  compared to its competitor ciders (e.g. Strongbow, or Blackthorn ). Interestingly, Scrumpy Jack have launched a campaign about Scrumpyshire in print and online, which also plays on setting, 'local-ness' and expertise - although arguably with less charm and humour.

Magners also seem to think about  their customers online. We are told that Magners' master tasters, including Billy who has been with us for 35 years, keep constant check on the whole process to  ensure each sip of Magners cider is as grand as the last.

    Magners' recent tactical print ads sticks two fingers up to the Treasury and nobly informs its customers that Magners have taken the financial hit on the increased alcohol duty itself, instead of passing it on to the customers. 

So a hearty thumbs up to cider-that-cares with an impressive campaign.

Magner-ifique. As they don't say in Clonmel.

Simon

The Planning Fallacy

 

 

If a group of people aim to get the same plane, they will arrive at the airport at different times. Some will be early and some will be on time; others will leave it until just before the check-in desk closes. 

This doesn't just happen when catching flights, of course. The completion of the new Wembley Stadium was delayed by over a year, from a March 2006 opening date until May 2007 ready for the FA Cup Final. Even the Sydney Opera house was planned for a 1963 opening, but opened 10 years later.

Why is this? Why do things take longer than we want?

In Kate Fox's 'Watching the English', she calls this 'the Planning Fallacy": people underestimate the time it takes to complete a task. Fox suggests it is because we have an emotional bias that leads us to wish for a goal that in practice is unrealistic. We may want to please someone or be under pressure to meet somebody else's deadline. Or we may not take in (or want to take in) all the external factors (like staff holidays or traffic jams) that may delay our plans.

IN THE KINGDOM OF THE BLAND ...

 

The launch of Kellogg's new cereal Krave has set me thinking. It looks delicious to me - mmm chocolate and hazelnut. But I was wondering whether people want to eat something so scrummy when they are blurry-eyed in the morning. Perhaps it's a cereal to be eaten during the day as a snack? Or back from the pub?  

I was looking at some figures for breakfast cereals and the massive players are the bland ones - the ones that don't engage the 'this-is-yummy' bits of the brain but let the eater come to in their own time. Corn Flakes, the Kellogg's variety, has about 11% share and Weetabix has about 9%. Porridge is doing pretty well, too.  

It seems that it is easy to add on, to make something more delicious, more complicated, and much more difficult to pare down and to reduce. And yet it is the plainer, simpler products that have stood the test of time. Perhaps because of versatility? Or maybe because there's only so much eating time in the day to devote to massively delicious tastes?  Plain crisps sell more than flavoured; plain biscuits more than the chocolate sandwiched with …  

Market research militates against the bland, too. Tasting in groups favours the stronger, sweeter, saltier product variations, because respondents have such a short time to try and the product that makes the most impact tends to be the one that is preferred. Tasting drinks is a case in point. We are able to quaff great quantities of blander drinks, with the stronger and more indulgent flavours reserved for the rarer occasion. So cup of tea anyone? Or would you prefer a hot chocolate with marshmallows and swirls of cream?  

Judith

Research 2010

It was an inspired opening. The first keynote speaker at this year’s annual Market Research Society Conference (Research 2010) was Armando Iannucci.

He was interviewed by Marc Brenner, who was at pains to avoid ‘doing an Alan Partridge’. (He saved this for the Big Thinkers session later.)

Armando has done lots of radio and TV series (eg On the Hour, The Day Today, The Thick Of It) and recently made an Oscar-nominated film, ‘In the Loop’.

He is also very funny. And thoughtful.

He told us about his (incomplete) PhD on Milton’s Paradise Lost, whose opening line matches the rhythm of the Flintstones theme tune. He took it as a sign that comedy may be his calling.

Although he also applied to join the civil service. And considered becoming a priest. I suspect he is a bit of a radical and dislikes being typecast.

So he probably would not much like the Daily Telegraph’s labelling him “the hard man of political satire”.

Thinking about it, he is a bit like Michael Moore. Michael Moore in disguise. A very good disguise, admittedly. But the similarities are there for all who don’t see too well.

They both make films. They both nearly became priests. They are both smart and funny and maverick. They both probably hate fatuous comparisons like these.

More to the point, Iannucci believes that playing films and clips to an audience is the best research you can do. The audience may be cruel and critical and fickle, but “if it doesn’t get any laughs, it hasn’t worked”.

His opening keynote address certainly worked and got the Conference off to a flying start.

NEW RESEARCH TECHNIQUES

 

As Simon Sylvester pointed out in his article Day of the Clones, everybody is pursuing ‘best practice’, and ‘benchmarking’ but this is another way of saying, doing the same as everyone else!

The result is that brand differentiation is becoming the main issue for brands, as in sector after sector, brands are offering the same products, to the same people, in the same style.

Part of the problem is that everyone is doing the same research, in the same way, using the same research companies.

We held a seminar last week on new techniques in qual research. We called it panning for gold, (hence the old timer above) and we focused on trance interviews (hypnosis) and ethnography.

The point is that to come up with new ideas and new ways of differentiating a brand it helps to open up your mind to some new research techniques. After all, as they say, if you always do what you've always done ...

Dominic

In Praise Of ... Ecotricity

 

It's been a while since our previous 'in praise of...' article. Shame on us. Step forward, Ecotricity - 'the world's first green electricity company'. 

Having just signed up to Ecotricity, this risks being tainted by a certain smugness, feeling a bit pleased about 'doing my bit' to reduce my carbon footprint. However, the intention is to praise a company worth its weight in ... um, carbon. If you haven't been put off by the Climategate email scandal and if you want to reduce your carbon footprint, check them out.

Firstly, it is easy to switch. You can either apply through the site OR (as I did) go to the Green Electricity Marketplace website. You can compare different tariffs, green-star ratings and ROCs. The switch is done between current provider and Ecotricity and all I've had to do is ask for my final bill and provide an up-to-date meter reading.

You Can't Put Me In A Box

(Picture by Treehugger)

We did a project for think tank ippr last year, on post-identity politics in contemporary Britain (Discuss), as reported here. The report based on our research, amongst other sources, has recently been released.

In "You Can’t Put Me In A Box”, the report’s authors Simon Fanshawe and Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah argue that Britain is not only more diverse than ever before but that diversity itself is growing more diverse. Today, identities are more complex and fluid than they used to be, reflecting shifting interests and allegiances.

The report explores how discrimination and disadvantage do not map easily on to orthodox ‘strand-based’ identity definitions and while it aims to provoke rather than answer questions, it concludes with some implications for policymakers and data collectors, amongst others.

One day, all research projects will be this interesting.

We remember Rover

"What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself" - Abraham Lincoln. 

We came across this front cover from Research Magazine. It is from the period just before Rover was taken over by the Phoenix Consortium in 2000, five years before Rover's demise.

It is ironic that although Rover is not around, 'focus groups' are. There were many reasons for Rover's decline, poor product development and strategy, greedy board members and lack of state intervention (to name but a few). But it is a brave or a failing brand that boasts about not listening to the public.

MyDavidCameron.com

 

We recently stumbled upon MyDavidCameron.com

It is a site using crowdsourcing to create their own online spoof advertisements, that then get posted onto the site (as long as they're decent). 

The website spoofs the Tory's campaign endline 'Year for Change' and plays on criticism that Cameron's image was airbrushed for their campaign poster. It uses the politics-of-and, which is a form of political airbrushing: you can't cut the deficit and not cut the NHS; you can't cut taxes and have better services (apparently).