Hmmm...

Philadelphia is gearing up for an interesting event that hits every market at some point. I'm talking about the inevitable "comeback" of an on-air talent to the market.

This time, it's notorious weatherman John Bolaris. I say "notorious" because John left the NBC affiliate in Philly not too long after predicting a "Storm of the Century" which never materialized. (In fact, it was barely more than a dusting of snow.) The fallout from this blown forecast was not pretty. He was excoriated by the local papers, some viewers wanted his hide, etc. This was a pretty ugly fate for a guy who was one of the station's top draws.

So, after 5 years or so, he's back. Only this time, he's going to work at the Fox affiliate. The promo embedded below is one of the handful of spots meant to tout his return. This particular spot has raised a few eyebrows because of what it has the nerve to bring up.



Now, some people think I'm nuts, but my initial reaction is that this spot is pretty clever. It lacks sufficient branding, that's true. I think it's almost too easy - especially if I'm a viewer who's only half paying attention - to walk away from it thinking he's going back to NBC. I think they'd have been better served selling the idea of "Old Town, New Address", especially since the average Philly viewer can't remember which talent is where. Notwithstanding, I think mentioning the "Storm of the Century" might be a smart move.

I mean, personally, I think you're insulting your audience if you pretend like you don't know what they're thinking in this case. Philly viewers may not remember who he works for, but they will remember that he blew a weather call, and a BIG ONE at that. So, if we all know what we're thinking, why not address it? It's the elephant in the room.

Some have told me that it only serves to remind folks. I dunno that they need reminding.

Some have said it was 6 years ago, why bring it up? In a function that thrives on credibility - like weather - it's still a relevant topic, even if it were 20 years ago.

Others have just declared that you don't ever mention this kind of thing (translation: never acknowledge your mistakes). I say tell that to the folks at JetBlue. They're living proof that sometimes the best thing you can do is admit a shortcoming, apologize, and commit publicly to make it right. (JetBlue's woes of a year ago could've killed the company. The fact that they're still in business, despite a nightmarish environment for their industry, is a testament to the power of apologies.)

Now, this spot doesn't necessarily do any of that. The way I hear it, it's deflecting blame. When I boil down what I hear in the copy, the message comes down to: "That time I blew the call wasn't my fault - it was the equipment."

Whether or not this works, only time will tell. But, I have a sneaking suspicion...

And, by the way, bully to the producer who sold management on taking this risk. I know it couldn't have been an easy sell.

Playing to Your Strengths

If you've read previous entries to this blog, you'll know that I am not above hawking books I think others could benefit from. It's an extension of my interpersonal habit of giving people books as gifts, particularly when I think a certain book can be of help to the recipient.

So, today, I'm at it again. This was recommended in passing during a class, and I decided to give it a try. Although the class proved to be useless, this book proved to be the polar opposite.

Now, Discover Your Strengths by Buckingham and Clifton is an attempt to create yet another personality and strengths assessment. The book comes with a unique code you can use to take their assessment test online. You would think, with all the options already out there (Meyers-Brigg, DISC assessments, etc.), this is just gonna be another feel-good exercise.

Well, it feels good - that I will admit. We all like learning what's great and special about ourselves. We're like that old hen in the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons - "Tell me more about my eyes!"

Where this book differs, refreshingly, is in its core assumption. Buckingham and Clifton offer the argument that most personality / strength assessments are focused on "damage control", specifically looking for areas of "weakness" so that they can be dealt with. This book seeks to flip that on its ear. Through their research with the Gallup Organization, they found that attempts to shore up weaknesses weren't nearly as effective as playing to people's natural strengths.

The revolution doesn't end there. Buckingham and Clifton reposition some personality traits - which would normally be treated as weaknesses (i.e. bluntness) - as strengths to be leveraged. This is particularly refreshing for those of us (translation: me) who have a personality trait that is seen as both a strength and a weakness, depending on your vantage point (i.e. bluntness).

The last - and I think, best - feature of this book is its concision. The authors make their case without belaboring it, and then devote the remainder of the book to the strength descriptions, and practical one-sheet guides on how to manage the different strengths your teammates / direct reports demonstrate.

Give this book a shot. Oh, and be sure to order it through an online vendor. The unique code for the online test is pretty easy to dig out. With people spending hours at bookstores these days, you never know when someone snagged the code from a shelf-copy and stuck you with an essentially useless book.

A Rough Year for ABC Stations

First, WABC goes up in flames. Now this....

Dangers of "The Lego Mindset"

It's the holiday season, and, of course, I've had to walk through some toy shops lately. So, this took me back to one of my favorites toys, Lego.

Who didn't love to play with Lego as a kid? It was a simple twist on building blocks, but so much better.

One of the best attributes of Lego was the interchangeability - each piece was immediately usable in any alternative circumstance. It took a small piece of plastic and gave it a million possibilities. Brilliant!

That same interchangeability, however, doesn't translate to other areas of life. In work, especially, falling into what I call a "Lego Mindset" is especially dangerous. Here are some examples...

The "Lego People Mindset"

As all teams eventually do, you lose a team member to another opportunity. Eventually, each team goes through a tough time transitioning to another person, the replacement. Rhythm is thrown off. The new person needs to be trained and acculturated to the new office and workflow. The previously established intimacy needs to be rebuilt or find a new equilibrium.

Depending on the speed of the transition, it is likely to find people complaining about the "new guy". He's got habits they're not used to. He's not accustomed to the workflow and is either responding to it too slowly or too quickly. Intimacy hasn't yet been established, and, by extension, neither has trust, so any questionable behavior is greeted with suspicion.

What's at work here is a combination of grief and the "Lego People Mindset"; grief over the loss of the previous teammate, and frustration over the new person's inability to immediately match everyone else's stride.

Think of a team of horses pulling a wagon. Adding in a new horse is disruptive. The new horse doesn't share the rhythm the other horses have from years of working in tandem. This new horse starts to drag on the team, and not through any fault of its own.

So it is with people. The frustration of developing a new stride and collective rhythm is felt pretty quickly.

What's needed here is understanding that people are not like Lego - they can't be plucked out of one construction, placed into another, and function at the same level right away. New situations present learning curves. As school should have taught us, we all learn at different speeds and in different ways. Some of us pick up a rhythm right away, others need to run with the pack several times before the pace internalizes.

No, the other guy isn't a screw-up. No, he's not slow, either. No, he's not busy building some corporate conspiracy. He's just not used to the way you do business. He doesn't have years of experience helping him instinctively make the next right move.

Also, he's busy trying to undo what habits he does have from previous places of employment. These changes in behavior don't take hold overnight. Give him a chance.

Now, in some cases, yes, the new guy is all of the negatives previously described. And in those cases, he should be let go. But don't jump to these conclusions faster than you should. I hate six month probationary periods for this reason. Not that probationary periods are bad, but they have a tendency to make managers hasty about switching people out. A manager who lacks confidence in her hiring decisions could be looking for an excuse to undo the decision - kind of like buyer's remorse.

The other tough part of the "Lego People Mindset" is how easy it is to fall into. I've seen previous victims of the "Lego People Mindset" turn around and impose the Mindset on others. That's unfortunate because I think that people who've overcome the "Lego People Mindset" can be the best tacklers of it. Nothing cuts through the nonsense more effectively than saying, "Hey, when I got here, you all thought the same of me... Give him a chance. He'll come around. I sure did."

The Lego Idea Mindset

I've written before about sampling in creative work. Sampling's an integral part of what we do. Wholesale re-creation, however, is another thing altogether. Apart from the moral questions it raises (i.e., "Isn't that a form of thievery?"), there's the danger of the "Lego Idea". Ideas that work in one situation are not immediately transferable to another. In our lingo, you can't always use a Chicago spot in L.A. and get the same results.

Ideas are funny things. Some are universal. Some only work in the minds of a select few.

So it is with promos. There are some ideas that translate. Truth be told, one hard news promo usually looks like all the others. Still, even then, you need to customize. Philly's version of hard news is different from San Diego's.

On a side note, this is why the "hubbing" trend worries me. From a pure business standpoint (dollars and cents), hubbing's a no-brainer. This attempt to contain costs, however, unintentionally hamstrings the creative process. Fewer artists / writers / producers working in full collaboration on singular products creates the opportunity for mish-mosh. We're all slowly starting look alike, sound alike, feel alike. Hubbing is exacerbating the problem. I don't blame the people working at hubs. In a create-on-demand environment, it is very easy to slip into a cookie-cutter mode, often without noticing it. But that's another article altogether. The point here is that this business practice not only invites a "Lego Mindset", it institutionalizes it. That's dangerous for creativity and works contrary to brand-building.

This doesn't just apply to product / content. This applies to how you run your office, too. I can't remember who, but a consultant I know once told me that the most dangerous time for any office is when the key individual (a CEO, a V.P., a department head) is at a conference. The rank and file should pray when the key individual leaves that an idea doesn't come back with that key individual. (And, by an idea here, I mean one of those things that takes over the key individual's head, making them want to remake the business in this idea's image - and yes, I do mean those religious overtones for effect.) These grand ideas don't usually translate properly, and, in the interim, only serve to disrupt the business.

Ideas are good. Ideas, however, need to be appreciated with a grain of salt. There's got to be some heavy consideration of applicability to the situation in question. Beware of "Lego Ideas".

In conclusion...

Creative work is unique. So, too, is the group of people who engage in it for pay. Each of us has a different perspective, a singular talent, an unmatched viewpoint.

We also have our own rhythms. Some of us just "crank", enjoying a steady level of output. Some of us "simmer", taking our time to put out our product. Most of us waver between the extremes - enjoying the occasional fertile period, settling into a manageable pace most of the time.

That rhythm is easily disrupted when we are transferred to new environs, or when our own environs change. Be careful not to let the pain and discomfort of the disruption lead you to hasty judgments about your teams. Let's be honest, teams form to eventually disband or change membership. Learning to apply patience and avoid the "Lego Mindset" is going to come in handy, and could ultimately be an important step in developing your teams of the future.

What great horn players can teach you about advertising

"Maceo! Blow your horn!"

Repetition has no greater master than Maceo Parker - the legendary sax player whose horn lines helped make James Brown the "Godfather of Soul". Nobody made points more simply and more often than Maceo. And that's the essence of advertising.

Write a funky line. Repeat. Repeat again. Repeat once more. And again.

Good advertising is heavy on the repetition. The truly gifted - like Maceo - find ways to make the point fun; the kind of point you wanna hear over and over again. Bud Light's got it. Geico's got it. Apple's got it.

Write a funky line. Repeat. Repeat again. Repeat once more. And again.

Trane - Explore your possibilities

Have you ever listened to John Coltrane's "My Favorite Things"? Apart from the 13+ minute treatment of the title tune, it is an album of experimentation. As is "A Love Supreme". As is "Giant Steps".

Further experimentation - he switched from clarinet, to alto sax, to soprano sax. He played with Miles, Monk and Ellington. His spiritual life was a mixture of predominant and not-so-predominant beliefs.

Yet the Coltrane sound was distinctive. It was the essence of his character. While it embraced all forms, it engaged each form in its own way.

13+ minutes of "My Favorite Things" is not an accident. It's a fairly straightforward tune from a very straightforward musical. Trane isn't just playing a long version of the tune. He's pushing its limits. He's testing its boundaries.

Now how about you? Have you explored your parameters like Trane?

The tune of your advertising can stand it, if you stay true to your brand's character. Think VW. The same folks who had the nerve to take out full page ads in the 60's jokingly calling their car a "Lemon", recently sold their cars on safety, then 6 months later on fun (with a little help from Wilco's "Sky Blue Sky"). Different selling points? Of course. But does it feel out of character? No. They've tested their advertising's limits and found it freeing. And it can be for you, too.

Next time you look at a blank script, think of Trane. Then, test your boundaries.

Miles and Evolution

A related lesson comes from Trane's contemporary and early partner, the legendary Miles Davis. (I had a music teacher tell me once that Jazz History can be traced through the work of five people - two of whom are Trane and Miles. It's not a coincidence that they both have lessons to impart.)

While Trane tested the internal boundaries of a piece, Miles tested the boundaries of new forms altogether. Miles led the transition of Jazz from BeBop to Cool to Fusion. He was the major proponent of each form, and without him, it's doubtful the forms would have taken real hold. His willingness to embrace new forms kept him relevant as most of his contemporaries faded away or died.

Does that sound at all like someone that you can learn from?

Miles' example is one of courage. Like the freedom offered by Trane's boundary-testing, Miles offers you hope. You can try something you never have, and if you've got a strong enough character, it'll work.

So, if you're shying away from new forms of advertising, why are you? Is there a valid business reason like poor return? That's good management. If it's because you're not quite sure how, that's not fine. Better to learn than to avoid.

If you're not sure how, take another lesson from Miles - pair up with someone who does. Bill Evans worked with Miles to initiate the Cool movement. Herbie Hancock was there with Miles in the move to Fusion. Who do you know who knows what you don't? Or, who do you know who's willing to take the risk with you? Leverage that and you might be surprised by the results.

The "Amen Break" and Creative Work

PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO FIRST!

(Sorry, this entry is entirely based on the video above. And, YES, I'm aware the video is 17+ minutes in length. Trust me, it's worth the time.)

This interesting treatment on a popular (almost ubiquitous) drum break has some interesting implications for what we do.

First, I must agree with the premise that improvement of any kind in society - be it artistic or scientific - is ultimately the result of improving upon previously available forms. The wheel goes on to be a rubber tire, and it gets there in increments. The exciting variable in the equation is where it will go next.

In similar fashion, creatives inspire one another and ultimately build on forms seen previously employed by someone else. As one animator learns how to pull off an interesting trick in After Effects or Maya, others notice, study what was done, recreate it, and then go on to add their own twist to it. And then the cycle begins anew.

I can't begin to count the spots that I've done that were touched off because of what I saw someone else do. I have sampled from other writers and producers. Basic premises. Lines. Visuals. I've done it all, adding, along the way, my own twist to match the local flavors and tastes of my particular product.

This admission should come as no surprise or shock. We all do it. It's the reason "State of Our Art" and "Best of Cable" are 2 of the best-attended sessions at Promax every year - we're looking for our next "sample".

And what about the drum breaks you've put in the ether? How often have you seen yourself get sampled? Were you impressed with the results and the new twists the sampler added?

The odd part here is where the line is drawn. I'm okay with someone sampling my ideas. Honestly, it's all part of the game. I do mind it when a competitor does it, though, because it muddies the waters. It undoes any branding I might have accomplished by associating the same ideas with a different product - and that's just bad for everyone involved, both the samplee and the sampler. I won't even get started on how lazy it is, too.

But what really burns me is copy-theft. A line or two I can live with. We've all heard someone put something into words better than we can. And, as in the academic community, I don't think it's a sin, so long as proper attribution is offered in the proper context (simply, don't pretend like it's yours - that's bad form).

What I'm talking about is wholesale copy theft - an entire script completely lifted, with little more than the call letters or station name replaced. That's worse than bad form, that's television's equivalent of plagiarism.

Now, this raises some questions of its own. See, this doesn't fall under the umbrella of plagiarism. I recognize that plagiarism is difficult to define in our business. The crux of the confusion is "Who owns this stuff?" I'm the writer, the creator - but I don't own what I make. We saw what happened when Letterman got into it with NBC over intellectual property. It becomes murky because someone else is footing the bill and paying me for the work. (It's interesting that these distinctions didn't previously matter. We associate the Sistine Chapel with Michelangelo, not Pope Julius II - although I know dragging Michelangelo into this is a stretch.) When it's over, these works of ours enter into someone else's possession, where they lay claim to the intellectual property - not unlike ZeroG records did to The Winstons. I don't know that that's fair or not, I only know where I lean. (If you can't quite tell, I support the WGA strike, so there it is.)

But, all that aside, I'd be interested to hear readers' thoughts on all of this. Have you ever been sampled? Or had copy stolen outright? (I have, and if I ever find you...) Anybody wanna give credit where credit is due - you know, a shout out for a great idea you sampled? Have at it! I think this is one of those bigger issues we should take some time to consider.

Using the "Flywheel" Concept for your Brand

Brands take a lot of work to build. They take so much work, in fact, that it’s very easy to derail a brand-in-process. Often it simply takes a momentary lapse of patience.

There’s a very good chance you’ve watched it happen, or worse, done it yourself. A change in management, or a slip in ratings, causes everyone to rethink a market position and start building a new brand. Or maybe you never even bothered to consider a market position and you just run with whatever comes to mind next.

I’m going to refer, again, to Jim Collins, author of “Good to Great (Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t)”. Among the interesting ideas uncovered in Collins’ research is the “Flywheel Concept”. I think this concept has direct lessons for us.

A flywheel is used to harness kinetic energy. It captures movement and turns it into inertia. It starts with a bit of pushing. At this stage, the flywheel needs regular, steady effort. Over time, the effort needed to keep it moving becomes easier to apply – momentum begins to take hold. Then, after patient, deliberate efforts, the flywheel reaches its breakthrough point. Inertia starts to set in. Now, you need only apply effort at intervals to keep it moving. The wheel is moving primarily on its own momentum.

That’s how it is with brands. At first, they take an extraordinary amount of effort. It starts with proper design, just like a flywheel. The things got to be built to keep moving – so make sure it’s got “legs”.

Then comes the effort it takes to make it move. Steady, regular, patient effort. There are no shortcuts here! You can’t take detours! You’ve got to devote yourself to building the necessary momentum to make inertia kick in. Anything that distracts you from this effort is only going to trip you up.

As the momentum begins to take hold, the effort becomes easier. It’s tempting at this point to think you’re done – you’ve built enough momentum to move onto other things. DON’T! You’re not done! The effort still needs to be applied.

Inertia kicks in when your effort takes on a life of its own. Collins defines what that looks like better than I can, so I’ll leave you in suspense. That way, you’ll buy his book.

The trick to all of this is the effort and the patience. Lord knows our business is very often short on both. But if you think about the brands that have done it right, it’s amazing how the flywheel concept does work.

•Downy
•Oil of Olay
•Starbucks
•Apple
•Nike

As different as these products are, they have one thing in common: These brands have the flywheel in motion. They applied the effort successfully and now have the freedom to simply maintain the momentum.

Here's the kicker: Once kinetic energy has been harnessed, it takes an equal amount of effort to bring the motion back to a state of rest. In other words, if you do this right, you'd have to undo it just as deliberately. Effectively, it becomes something of its own insurance policy AND security system. Now that's quite a trick. More importantly, think of the implications for your business of a brand that moves on its own momentum.

Case in point: The Tylenol Crisis in the 80's. Here was an incident that threatened to quickly kill one of the world's best-known and most-used brands. But Tylenol had so much momentum in its brand that the general public wanted - deep down - to keep using Tylenol. That's momentum at work. Johnson and Johnson's response to the crisis: "Leverage our momentum". It engaged the public with honesty and care, going so far as to tell the public to stop using their product while they addressed the problem. Hell, they even invited 60 Minutes into their offices and labs while they worked it out! Momentum let them do that without killing the business. What's more, when J&J was ready to put the product back on the market, they gave their flywheel a nice steady push. They advertised and promoted their new safety bottles until the momentum was back in full swing.

These days, Tylenol is sold with the same respect for the consumer's need, and, interestingly, with warnings about its misuse. J&J took the honesty and forthrightness it showed in the crisis and turned it into part of their brand. That's brilliant. Lemons into lemonade right there.

Now think of the result if it had been someone else. If it had been a painkiller without the history and momentum of Tylenol. It would've been a very different outcome.

Read more about the flywheel at JimColiins.com.

Oh man, I wanna see the topical...

Kill five minutes....

Can you tell who's who? (Heads up: There's some spicy language on this thing.)

I'm mesmerized... by Esteban??!!

God help me, but I am!

Have you ever watched this guy push his guitars of questionable quality? It's a scene! Just two hours ago, I sat absorbed in wild wonder as he moved almost 12,000 units of his newest guitar - a guitar designed as a tribute piece to a 50's Chevy Bel-Air, with real melamine backboards, mother-of-pearl inlays on the guitar's neck, a 20 DVD lesson set, a set of special Esteban guitar picks...

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, how the Hell does he convince people to buy this?!

Look, I got nothing against the guy. I admit a leather Zoro hat on a white guy doesn't fool me - We know he was born Steve, NOT Esteban. And, the Man in Black thing worked better for Johnny Cash. But, hey, criticisms aside, this guy can push product. I highly recommend watching him work to anybody in our profession. It's a sight to behold.

They say Rasputin had a way of looking at people that left them naked before his influence. I fear Esteban has learned that look.

Put HSN and QVC on your cable favorites list and just cruise by every now and then, see if you catch him on-air. I dare you to try and watch for just five minutes. IT CAN'T BE DONE!

Team Dynamic Lessons from Geese

Someone shared these lessons with me recently. They're pretty interesting - although I admit I usually don't like these kinds of platitudes. I think there's something to take away from this.

What's wrong with us?

(read this out loud in your best Andy Rooney)
Have you ever wondered what's wrong with us? What it is about our personalities that draws us to this profession? I've been doing that a lot lately, and I've come up with some theories - some flattering, some not. So, strap in, it's about to get uncomfortable.

Mascohism
Let's start with the unpleasant, almost abusive, qualities of what we do.

It all starts the day you get hired. "Everybody here just loves your reel. The writing is sublime, the edits are really clean and cool, and it's obvious you know how to put butts in the seat. We'd love to have you join the team for less than we would pay a fry cook at McDonald's - whaddayasay?"

Then, you start meeting the happy workers. The editor who reminds you of Milton from Office Space. The "Senior/Executive Producer" who's suddenly threatened by your arrival. The news producer who "really gets promotion" but treats you with just enough hostility to prove otherwise. Yeah, this is gonna be great.

When the GM finally comes around to tell you that he needs you to come up wtih something brilliant because times are tough, the mental burden is just icing on the cake.

Weekends lost in edit booths because of last minute changes. Birthdays ruined by clients who didn't tell you they tweaked their logos when you weren't looking. Cigarettes inhaled because a bad story led to a bad promo, and, ultimately, a bad rating - but somehow it's your fault. Ah, good times...

Why do we put up with it? Masochism seems too easy an answer.

Character Deficiencies
"High expectations. Low commitment levels." (I hereby lay claim to that phrase. And I expect royalty payments!)

But don't those 5 words say it all about us? We want to set the world on fire, 30 seconds at a time. Do some really great work, and then move on to the next one. Is it any wonder so many of us have a mental crutch of some kind - drink, women/men, food, thrills, etc. Anything that will help get us through to the next big expectation.

It's also why so many of us have a hard time in relationships. God bless any poor soul who falls in love with a "Creative". Talking shop all the time, missing your kid's recital, being occassionally mentally absent becuase you're tossing around an idea and don't realize it.

And yet these failings can be considered almost endearing when measured against those of us who exhibit far more disappointing traits:

- The Fickle: "I love working with you (until I don't)."

- The Cowardly: "I've got your back (until it puts mine at risk)."

- The Lazy: "Sure, I could come up with another idea, but they're gonna shoot that one down, too, so forget it."

- The Obsessive: "I know this hits air in five minutes, but could we skip this hit? I know I can get this edit right..."

Thankfully, we have some redeeming qualities that mask the shortcomings - we tend to be a fun, gregarious bunch. But there's clearly a defect in our personalities that makes this career a proper fit for us.

Now, in our defense....

High expectations aren't a bad thing, but you know that. The really great part is when we extend those high expectations beyond the work.

"To have high expectations of others is to have faith in them. It is an expression of optimism and hope in the capacities of another. It is an expression of the connection between people and is experienced as support." - Peter Block

Anybody who's worked on a solid team will testify to that. The necessities of what we do require high expectations of others. No one producer is ever responsible for a great spot, but one usually is to blame for a bad one. Why? Because we work best when we collaborate. Smart producers / creatives are never too proud to borrow a better idea when it's offered. In that sense, we stand as an example to every other working schmuck.

Here's another way...

Most people go to work every day and do stuff that in no way reflects them personally. I'm sure some accountants out there would argue otherwise ("Hey, I know when Dave's touched an audit!"), but really good producers put a stamp on their work. People can just tell that Ron did it - or Sarah. That's a unique gift - you won't get that very many places. Maybe that's why we put up with the masochistic realities of our jobs. Hell, anybody can file! Only a select few can come up with a great sell for a weight-loss story that's been done to death, while fielding a phone call from your doctor to tell you you're hypertensive.

"Well, of course I am, Doc - you're calling me in the middle of an edit!"

What Jesus can teach you about research

Officiant: Christ be with you

Response: And also with you.

Officiant: A reading from the Gospel of Mark. (Chapter 8 - "The Message" Translation)

27Jesus and his disciples headed out for the villages around Caesarea Philippi. As they walked, he asked, "Who do the people say I am?"

28"Some say 'John the Baptizer,'" they said. "Others say 'Elijah.' Still others say 'one of the prophets.'"

29He then asked, "And you—what are you saying about me? Who am I?"

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Does any of this sound familiar? If you're a promotions professional, it should.

Bet you've gone to church your whole life, probably heard this passage, and never realized you were listening to Jesus performing his own market research...

That's right, the Son of God took time to assess his brand. So why don't you? It's the only way to measure your effectiveness. John Wanamaker, the famous department store giant, once said, "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted. Trouble is, I don't know which half." We live, however, in a much more sophisticated age, where you can get that half down to a much smaller percentage, and it's all done through market research and brand testing.

It's not often you can refer to the Bible for advice on how to promote or build an audience. But considering I am a minister's boy, I guess it's only right I spread some Gospel. (I say this knowing someone reading this considers this blasphemous. That's not my intent - I believe very firmly in the value of the Bible as a collection of life lessons, both personal AND professional. Rather than judge, pray for my soul.)

Mind you, I am not a blind adherer to research. Research has its definite pitfalls. I won't even bother making the arguments against research. Charley Holland did a brilliant job of that here. But the (rampant) problems Charley describes are a matter of bad research design.

Research - done properly - is still useful. If nothing else, it gives you the baseline on what you're doing right and what you're doing wrong; what's cutting through about you and what isn't. In a time of diminishing returns, too many of our businesses have let go of tracking market reactions to their products. But why? A carpenter from Nazareth knew better, but multi-million dollar operations don't?

Notice the simple, yet profound, nature of Jesus' questions... "Who do the people say I am?" When's the last time your organization really asked that question?

Believe it or not, brands can be impaired or run down like any piece of equipment in an overworked factory. They can fizzle out. Worse, they can die. Just because your brand research from 5 years ago says "X" doesn't mean "X" is still relevant.

This is not a time to drop research, or to settle into assumptions about your brand. Now, more than ever, we need to all keep our ears to the rail. We need to spend time data-mining, and analyzing our brands' life cycles. Among the champions of research, promo folks should be the chiefs.

Now, I know that can be tough. Jesus had twelve good buddies in the trenches with him offering up their insights. Most stations, by contrast, have someone who you rarely see, who rarely does anything, and rarely wins any arguments for the value he/she can provide. As a result, these people get treated as little more than industry overhead - there to manage the Nielsen relationship, make some one-sheets for Sales, and quietly await retirement.

It shouldn't be that way, though. We promotions folks should be rattling that person's cage by bringing them interesting questions to data mine answers to. We should extol their worthwhile contributions. And we should actively decry any management that seeks to stifle useful research. If we're ever to find out which half of the advertising dollar is wasted, then the "bean counters" need to appreciate the dollar return that research can bring.

One more point: Notice Jesus flips the question on his inner circle while he's at it. Sometimes the most useful research you can do is internal. It's important to measure external reactions to promotion and your brand. If, however, people don't get the brand from the inside, your efforts could ultimately be self-defeating. It's not helping if you say your organization is community-friendly, but the rank and file think it's okay to funnel viewer complaints to an answering machine, aka the "viewer hotline".

If the people within an organization don't understand and believe in the brand, they will never live up to it or spread the gospel. Jesus got that. That's why, in Matthew's account of this same conversation, Jesus makes a big deal and praises Peter for getting the brand.

That's another key point: Take those people who embody your brand internally and make them your company's superstars. Brands work best, and gain the most traction, when they are embodied consistently. Employees learn to embody the brand when they're offered examples of behavior consistent with that brand. Somewhere in your organization - and sadly, it's usually NOT in management - your brand's living embodiment lurks. Find that person and turn them into a big deal. When others take on similar characteristics, make a big deal out of them, too. The "Gospel of Your Brand" will follow those apostles within and without your organization.

Now, if I could just solidify my thoughts on what Moses can teach you about differentiation....

Parting thought:
"[Christ] would be a national advertiser today, I am sure, as He was a
great advertiser in His own day. He thought of His life as business."
-Bruce Barton, Founder of BDO and author of "The Man Nobody Knows"

The Liability of Charisma

Jim Collins is one of my favorite business writers. His "Good to Great" will be one of the classics of business literature and will become a central part of business study - of that, I am sure.

In "Good to Great", he defines a key concept, "Level 5 Leadership". I won't attempt to explain it here. But, in that discussion, Collins points out an interesting concept I think all of us would do well to learn - the idea that charisma is a liability.

This should make you sit up and pay attention, because in our business we all work with charismatic people, or are lucky enough to be one ourselves (don't bother being modest about it, alright?). While this is usually a good thing - people like charisma, it draws followers and disciples - Collins raises the interesting point that charisma is difficult to challenge. It intimidates, it overcomes, and in business, it stifles.

Think about it - who was the last person who you should've told some unpleasant truth or fact to, but didn't because that person was too powerful a character... You didn't speak truth to power because, somehow, you just couldn't.

Now, think about the number of business leaders who rise to their positions in part because of their smarts and experience, and in part because of their personality. I can think of a few GM's. Maybe a Creative Services Director or two. People who just loomed large.

Putting that person aside, consider instead what fact you didn't share and how important it was or is to your business' health. That person really needed to hear from you, regardless of the script playing out in their head.

Yes, the script playing out in their head - you know, the "I-know-better" attitude, or the "Don't-mess-with-my-public-image" message. One of the dangers of being charismatic is that you can be allowed, by most, to live life according to your script. Think of some of the more charismatic people in business. Iacocca. Welch. Lay. Paley. Some go on to greatness, some go on to infamy - but all live according to their little script.

Which is the danger the rest of us need to deal with. When you think about it, how likely is it that the issue you should've raised didn't get raised because you knew it flipped the script? ... yep, I figured...

So, as you move up and ahead, examine your own script carefully. Don't fall into a place where people don't feel safe telling you what you may very well need to hear. This is one of the key reasons less charismatic (aka, dull) leaders almost always produce better long-term results.

Visit Collins' site for some great resources, including discussion notes (great for lunch with trusted colleagues), and his assessment test for Good versus Great.

It's about f***ing time somebody proved this s**t!

Finally, a good business reason for not censoring yourself around the office.

When did you last get some good advice?

Here's a cool article from the Harvard Biz Review wherein CEO's recall the best advice they ever got. (Note the nice story about advertising legend David Ogilvy.)

Testing Your Organizational Bullshit Level

We all know it when we see it - or smell it... I'm talking about office bullshit. Those words/phrases/commitments that we know are barely worth the air used to speak them, let alone the paper used to disseminate them. As promotional workers, however, bullshit should be near the top of our list of problems to tackle.

"Uh oh, where are you going with this? Aren't we - the promo guys and gals - the purveyors of bullshit?"

If that is so, God help us.

The key to good promotion isn't who can tell the biggest lie, or who can sucker the most people in. Leave that for the hacks that write promos for the nightly entertainment mags... "J. Lo - on camera - kissing another man! What does Marc think?" Hey, Mary Hart! Marc doesn't care, 'cause she's kissing another guy for a movie she's shooting... Marc Anthony can see through your bullshit teases just like the rest of us can, so spare me!

Anyway, where was I? Oh, right...

Our job is not to make up the truth; it's to dig for the sexiest part of the truth and then tease that part of it. Sizzle, not steak - but the steak does have to exist.

If we are looking to tackle bullshit, why don't we start by gauging our perceived bullshit with an exercise I learned from one of my professors. Get a pencil and some scratch paper... Go ahead, I'll wait...

OK, now draw three horizontal lines through the sheet, essentially splitting the page into three equal portions.

Now, in each of the boxes, answer the following questions:

Thinking of your organization, what is

1. Your secret motto for success?
2. The phrase(s) / slogan(s) / mantra(s) that you know is a lie, but travels around the office like a bong at a frat party
3. The unspoken truth about your organization

(These questions are somewhat ambiguous. That's by design. Answer them as you understand them.)

What my professor found in his research is that people tend to answer the first question about themselves - literally "Your secret motto". Most people don't have a clue what the organization's motto is, in most cases. So, what you get is a sense of how people perceive they can build their future.

The 2nd & 3rd questions get answered in view of the office, without fail. Look at the answers you put down. Did you fill the sheet? Did you barely come up with anything? That should tell you something right there. Are you surprised by these answers? That should tell you something else, too. How about you? Have you said these things? Have you perpetuated the bullshit? What does that tell you?

... or how 'bout a game of "Buzzword Bingo"? That'd be a much more fun way to assess the bullshit around you.

Get some trusted colleagues together. Make up some custom "Buzzword Bingo" cards before your next big meeting. It's easy to do. You can make one here.

Once you've set up the cards, print 'em out and then go into your meeting. Listen for those buzzwords - or, in our case, bullshit words - and cross them off, discreetly, of course. To incentivise the players, promise the winner some free coffee. You get the data. Which words came up? How often?

OK, why should anybody care? Here's the thing about bullshit: Audiences can smell it, too. It's easy to separate nicely crafted phrases from ugly unspoken truths. Claim your station is community friendly, but you can't remember the last time your on-air talent engaged with the public? Claim you have the best weather equipment in town, but no one notices any bells and whistles? Talk about how interesting your on-air talent is, but it's clear nobody would willingly share a cup of coffee with them?

Audiences see through the bullshit. It's why we hate when they call and complain about promos that over-promised - 'cause we know they've figured us out.

So how can promotions personnel be positively motivated bullshit detectors - first, for the viewer, and, second, for your organization? (Again, you should know that I see promotions people as perfectly positioned to act as internal consultants and problem solvers. Few people in a station get around like we do. We are every bit the "Connectors" Malcolm Gladwell described in "The Tipping Point". So, I think we can be catalysts for positive change, from bullshit to honest communication in our organizations.)

Let's get this straight: The purpose isn't simply to have the satisfaction of calling bullshit. That can be very satisfying, but occasionally dangerous (read "Beware the Shadow Organization" in our Sept. 2007 archive). The purpose is to get bullshit out of the way to get to some real work.

Bullshit serves a lot of functions for the people who engage in it. These functions include:

- A crutch
- Distraction
- Smokescreen
- Avoidance

None of the aforementioned functions have a place in a healthy organization, however. Healthy organizations deal in facts, making their decisions based on what they know they know, and implementing real solutions. Healthy organizations don't suffer bullshit; they see it for the waste of time and resources it is. (For a better handle on how really extraordinary organizations deal with their environment, you can't do wrong with "Good to Great".)

Bullshit, however, can only be eliminated when people actively and effectively address it. To do that, we need to consider the audience, and tailor messages that work for them (didn't I tell you promo personnel are perfectly suited for this sort of thing?). Again, we have some basic questions to deal with:

- Who's got their B.S. in B.S.? Identify the major culprit(s). Is it a person of influence within the organization? Worse, is it a member of Senior Management? What can you do to steer this person clear of bullshit?

Sometimes you just have to resort to a time-honored trick of mothers - take it away from them. Find proof that refutes the bullshit. Steer management to accepting some new / additional measures of performance. Any tactic that forces a head-on collision with reality will help. (Mind you, this can be the long road. Depending on the person upholding the bullshit, you could find this turns into a test of wills. Facts are facts, but sometimes they can be manipulated. And, when the target sees you're out to take his/her bullshit away, he/she'll probably fight you.)

Depending on your ties to this person, maybe you can do some digging. Is there a way to extract the truth out of this person? Now, this is tricky. People lock themselves into bullshit sometimes for protective reasons. Trying to take it away is like ripping a safety blanket from a child - it has to be done just so or the kid will blow a gasket. But, if you can get to a place of honesty, maybe you can sway this person into believing it's possible to let go of bullshit. (This is the easier road. It lets the perpetrator save face if he/she drops the bullshit on his/her own.)

- Where'd this bullshit come from? Consider the root causes of the bullshit. Is it simply that no one is willing to point it out? Folks, if it's that simple, why wouldn't you be the brave soul? But, if it's more complicated, you need to know. Is it a way to cover up bigger problems? Is it the symptom of an ineffective manager or management team? Depending on how systemic the bullshit is, maybe you just need to know so you can save yourself...

- How do I stop encouraging the bullshit? Bullshit is a cycle. One person offers it, another chooses to accept it. The way to slow the proliferation of bullshit is simple - Don't play party to it. Be respectful, but make it clear that you don't want to be feeding the beast. Push a little harder for truthful selling points in your promotion. Ask more questions. Demand transparency.

The hard part here is the lack of easy rewards. It's easy to give in, fudge the promotion, and enjoy the easy score of ill-gotten ratings. But it's shortsighted. No one's paying you to build an audience for one night.... (Well... If they are, you need to get out of there. Managers who go for the cheap score are the kinds of people who eventually become Jeff Skilling. You don't need to be anywhere near that.) Dare to try harder.

Look, after all this, the ultimate point is that it's not okay to partake in bullshit in your work. That isn't your job as a promotions professional. You've got to find what's special about your organization. Once you've found it, it's on you to tell the world. You're a cheerleader. A noisemaker. A fan. And you GET PAID for it! To cheapen that by allowing bullshit in your work, or in your environment, is to ruin the simple nobility that is available to you in your position. And that's no bullshit....

Wanna know more about bullshit? Try Harry Frankfurt, and Lois Beckwith.

Another reason to manage your image like you manage your product's image

Before you hit the job market again, here's some food for thought from the Wall Street Journal today.

Help for the Promotionally Challenged

Not sure how to bring in a 50 share anymore? Our friends at Current.TV have been kind enough to boil down "The Art of the Promo" to a few, simple rules. Enjoy!

From the Unfortunate Copy Choice Dept.

I could, but I won't...

It's just too easy....

Seriously, how did the graphics guys not stop them on this one?

Beware the "Shadow Organization"

Think back to the last time you pissed someone off at work. Maybe it was more than one person. Did you piss off a whole department? Or give people in places of influence a reason to band against you? Perhaps a reason to distrust, feel threatened, or attacked by you?

You, my friend, may have a "Shadow Organization" working against you...

"Shadow organizations" (a term coined by psychologist Gerry Egan) are groups of people - particularly in work environments - who pursue particular agendas within an organization. These are the political unions, factions or alliances that may spring up as business transpires. Unlike spy movies, however, these organzations are rarely acknowledged or set up in a conscious manner. They usually just evolve. That lack of real organization makes them particularly tough to notice.

Sometimes the shadow organization can be as small as one person; one key individual with enough power, influence or visibility to single-handedly impair a project with either half-hearted commitment or thinly veiled distaste.

Consider the following possibility:
You advocate for a change that impacts multiple departments in your company. For different reasons, a trio of line managers become opposed to the change objective; one objects to the bottom line impact for his budget, another objects to the possible increased work flow on his people, still another simply objects because he is 6 months from retirement and has no interest in being a part of a major project on his way out. Each of these people will find ways to block, stall or openly confront this change objective. In the worst case, they will band together - although working separately - to kill the objective.

The trick to surviving the threat of shadow organizations is to play the political game, while taking special care not to appear political. Ah, there's the rub. That's a skill few, if any, possess.

In the scope of a promotion producer's duties, shadow organizations are a very real threat; often forestalling plans, but more importantly, the occassional career. Promotions producers float among a set of various departments, acting as servant to the needs of some, consultant to the challenges of others, and sounding board to all. A good producer is often pointing out what's missing - angles that make a story more promotable, shortcomings of video, strapped resources. In the commission of her duties, a promo producer's honesty and frankness are necessary attributes. Exhibiting them, however, comes with an occassional price.

The trick to surviving this threat lies in "knowing the audience" - my, doesn't that sound familar? Like any other project under our supervision, we need to treat each interaction like a spot. Before putting words and thoughts on paper - or in this situation, out in the world - it pays to consider:

1. Who's the audience? We all know our co-workers and internal clients better than we give ourselves credit for. We know who bristles at suggestions, who invites them, and who is too afraid to be given a decent idea. Make selective, uniquely-tailored choices about how to address the problem and the person. Just like a well-produced promo gets past an audience's indifference, your message can get past the defenses of a shadow organization when presented properly.

Consider the advice of Robert Greene in his book, "The 48 Laws of Power". Rule #19: Know who you're dealing with - do not offend the wrong person;

"The ability to measure people and to know who you're dealing with is the most important skill... Without it you are blind... Know their ins and outs before you even decide whether or not to deal with them..."

Care for a more pro-active approach? Rule 33: Discover each man's thumbscrew;

"One of the most importnat things to realize about people... is that they all have a weakness, some part of their psychological armor that will not resist, that will bend to your will if you find it and push on it. Some people wear their weaknesses openly, others disguise them. Those who disguise them are often the ones most effectively undone through that chink in their armor."

2. What's my objective in raising this? Admit it, sometimes you want to call a person out. Or an expensive bureau is constantly under-utilized. Whatever the motivation, is there a greater amount of motivation out there to oppose my point? Ultimately, we need to be authentic with the people we work alongside. But take a minute to clarify your motives to yourself. If they're all about you, maybe it's best to leave that alone.

3. Who do you threaten? Yeah - I said it! Our business is in a state of turmoil or denial (depending upon your vantage point), and it's a tough time for those who once basked in the glory of 50 shares. In some cases, the downswing in business is matched by a downswing in energy and ambition, what with Father Time setting in. Put yourself in these peoples' shoes. NOW how do you sound? Put in their position, how much would you want to shut you up?

4. How well do you know your history? Honestly, when's the last time you traced the relationship tree in your organization? Who worked with who where? How did Person A and Person B becomes such enemies? Why does Person C demonstrate an almost Quixotic loyalty in Person D? The answers are in your organizational history. Sometimes your market history. Maybe even the corporate history. That old saying about folks who don't learn from the past is right - the past comes back on them.

The flispide is they also miss the good parts of the story. How C & D became such friends and partners will very often tell you about C & D individually, and C & D as a shadow organization. These are lessons and details you're wasting if you don't learn the history.

Find a good organization historian. One who's information can be readily verified. Sometimes, all you have to do is ask these historians general questions: i.e. "Where'd that policy come from?" Those five words could then lead to an afternoon of useful information gathering. It's vital information about how your organization - and the shadow organization(s) within it - has evolved.

I'm sure someone is feeling this article is sounding paranoid. Never forget: Just because you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they're not really out to get you. Well, maybe not you - maybe just what you stand for.

My point is, shadow organizations exist - good, bad, or indifferent. Look for them, understand what motivates their actions and how they mobilize. Then, deal with them effectively.

This isn't some "CYA" centered behavior - it's work centered behavior. Nothing can come from good intentions alone. Get my drift?