• On a more constructive note than the last post, it’s time to think about getting back to more planning basics. I’m promising this on the blog to make sure I actually have to do it….

    In the next few weeks, I’m  going to get through as much about research as I can, then we’ll move on to other stuff.  It will go something like this…………

    100_1974

    Using research:

    1. The planning cycle -and where research and information fit in.
    2. Using research and info to help you write effective creative briefs.
    3. Using research to to HELP, not hinder creative development.
    4. Monitoring advertising effect

    Then we’ll go into specific tips on methodology:

    1. Using research already in existence -desk research, TGI, retail and consumer audits.
    2. Thoughts on quant sampling.
    3. Qual or quant? How to decide.
    4. Finding and choosing research agencies.
    5. How research agencies work – and your respective roles.
    6. Some pointers on making sense of quant research results.
    7. Moderating focus groups
    8. Using qual in creative development
    9. Depths and ethnographic work

    Then, after all that:

    1. How to brief for integrated campaigns.
    2. Writing great creative briefs
    3. Your role in the creative process
    4. Writing presentations
    5. Brainstorming

    That’s a lot to get through, but I think it’s valuable for poor buggers like me that either went on an APG course (and don’t forget much of this is gleanings from that stuff) or had to use the force. It’s designed to be basic starts, do not expect much else.

  • Yes, clumsy-itis strikes again. I’ve just spilt hot tea all over my desk. What an idiot.

    100_1739

  • As I’ve mentioned before that I have more than a passing interest in economics it won’t come as a surprise that I’ve enjoyed ‘Why most things fail’ by Steve Ormerod.

    Amongst other things he extends the idea that most of the theory you get in economic, and dare I say, marketing books, bears little relation to reality. A big theme is how most ventures are doomed to failure thanks to the impossibility if making good decisions in the face of bewildering variables. Life is just too complex.

    This where I want to pick up on ‘Game theory’, but first I need to begin at the beginning. Most books will tell you that markets are perfect mechanisms for setting prices thanks to demand and supply. If something is scarce, if lots of people want it, the price will be high. But while it’s true to a point, it’s just too flawed for proper business decisions. Don’t believe me? Take a look at Ebay.

    Ebay

    Pick a popular item, something that sells every day. Look at the selling price. How come it’s never the same? All those variables – most acutely irrational human behaviour. We still do not know exactly how markets work. Seriously.

    Tesco

    Take supermarkets. They play an elaborate game on two fronts. First, they’re facing off against consumers ina daily game of balancing what people want to pay and what the supermarket wants to charge. Setting the price for own brand baked beans isn’t as simple as how much of it is about, it’s also about fluctuating disposable income, food fashion, culture in general, weather, debt and bills.

    Then there’s the other game with competitors. How each prices their stuff affects the other. They don’t KNOW how much the other will charge, they have to assume. It’s a constant jostling for position, making you’re move while subject to imperfect knowledge of what the opponent will do. This is ‘Game theory’ – the discipline of multiple players making decisions to maximise their own returns, in the face of imperfect knowledge of what the opponents can, or will do next. There’s a price war starting right now between Tesco and Asda in the UK. Despite what they may say, neither of them really know how it will end.

    It’s a truism of human bahaviour. The Bay of Pigs was a classic example of brinkmanship, as was the whole Cold War.

    Kennedy2506flag

    It’s a game of chess, where a good deal of your strategy has to take into account what the other will do. Mathematicians, economists and other great thinkers have spent decades trying to figure out solututions to the simplest scanarios. And they just can’t do it. Even the biggest computers in the world can only work out all possible moves for the first few moves in chess, after that it just get’s too complex.

    No one truly knows a perfect way to set price in market, not just because of complexity, it’s also down to the fact that humans are simply not rational. You have the best ideas and people just won’t behave.

    For planners and marketers………if you can’t even fix a price perfectly –  since you can’t predict what people will do next –  imagine trying to map a market, or doing research or, gulp, pre-testing. You need to have a good idea that brand communication will work, but you cannot know for sure, and the more you rely on people rationally doing what the data predicts they’ll do, the more likely things will go horribly wrong.

    Positioning can never be an exact science, nor can developing work for a specific, quantifiable objective……. it’s too complex and people are, well, people. That may sound like bad news but I find it quite liberating.

    Trying to appeal to rational beings is doomed, information doesn’t work by itself, but all the economic geekery suggests to that relying on data to predict the future is very, very dangerous.

    Of course you should sort out empirically what others in the market are, but that should be no more than a guide, as should or telling people what the data thinks they want to hear. You simply cannot predict how people will behave to that level of perfection.

    Never forget what the market seems to be telling you, but in the end, it’s the ideas that transcend TGI’s and mapping stuff that matter don’t you think?

  • It’s less than a month until the ‘swim a mile in the sea while not looking too stupid next to your nephews’ challenge and it’s going sort of OK, despite the fact it’s distance swimming, which is not something my body likes doing.

    Goggle

    The first few weeks were not easy. My body loves doing a hard pace for a medium-ish distance, it’s not used to going for stupidly long distances. So it’s being asked to go well out of it’s comfort zone four or five times a week.

    At first I kept hitting a wall (metaphorically). The pain gave way to numbness and I lost rhythm, leaving me thrashing around for a third of each session. Some of that was muscles crying, "Stop". Some was the need for more ‘feel’, but most of it was technique.

    For years I’ve been used to quick breathing, meaning my head doesn’t stay long out the water to gulp down oxygen. But longer distances mean you have to take in a lot more air, and taking longer to breathe unbalanced my stroke. You can get away with little imperfections when you’re feeling strong, but when you get tired, they start to magnify into real problems. An adjustment to the head position and coming through with the right arm a bit deeper seems to have sorted it out. It’s coming together.

    Then yesterday I did 60 lengths in about 20 minutes. That’s about the distance of the race and the target time. The pool is not the same as the sea, but it’s encouraging. And it felt good, really good. The stroke was silky smooth, it was nice sort of pain that tells you the body’s working, but there’s more to come. A lot more.

    That’s the thing about training for something. You need to get a certain level first before you can start to REALLY train. That’s where I seem to be now. I’m not saying I wouldn’t prefer to stay in bed on the odd morning, I can’t pretend it doesn’t hurt still, but that’s the fun. It’s not really worth it if you don’t have to try.

    On another note, it’s interesting watching the body adjust. I’m getting noticeably lankier and leaner, the shoulders are growing out of proportion with the rest of my body. No webbed feet yet, but give it time.

  • Every silver lining has a cloud…..

    Ten

    1. Insomnia
    2. Cursed Big Brother
    3. The constant rain
    4. The annoying music you get on the Sky TV guide
    5. HGV’s overtaking each other
    6. Spam emails offering to make me thin or hard
    7. Badly made tea. In the pot I tell you!
    8. IT people who think it’s MY job to support THEM
    9. Worrying nosebleeds
    10. Slow swimmers in my lane
    1. Why Most Things Fail by Paul Ormerod.
    2. The daily re-runs of the X-Files on UK Living (or the big conspiracy episodes at least). God it was good.
    3. Mozzarella in salad.
    4. Heroes coming to BBC2 (missed the start on Sci Fi channel and had to wait).
    5. Poached eggs on toast at weekends.
    6. Jenny Yeardley. Old friend I’m working with for the first time in about 5 years.
    7. Howies ‘slouch’ trousers that have just reached that lovely ‘worn in’ point.
    8. Tea made in the pot (of course).
    9. My mobile phone (I didn’t have it for 5 days, it was chaos).
    10. Mrs NP (ever).
  • The easiest of recipes. It’s better than anything you’ll get out of a tin that needs heating up. Fresher, zingier and just more REAL. You need:

    Two tins of good quality chopped tomato (no additives please, organic if you can)

    A handful of fresh, chopped basil

    Juicy clove of garlic, crushed (if you can find smoked garlic than even better)

    Put the chopped tomato in a blender and whiz until smooth. Put in a pan with the crushed garlic and half the basil. Heat it gently until it comes to the boil, then throw in the rest of the basil. Done. Serves two.

    It’s great with some parmesan grated into it, or even a dollop of creme fraiche. DON’T put the creme fraiche in while it’s bubbling it will curdle and go manky. Just turn it off the heat and wait a couple of secs for the boiling to stop – and stir hard and well.

    If you’re feeling racy, you could roast a big punnet of fresh beef tomato chopped into quarters. Just sprinkle it with olive oil and roast at 180% for 20 minutes, or until the edges start to go black. Blend the whole lot. This gives a much deeper flavour, and will have far more nutrients. It just means you have to spend more money and you’ve a roasting tin to wash.

  • Rob’s posted a couple of related things today.  The first is about Lauren’s frustration with not fitting into a pre-judged opinion of what she should like. The second one is about knowing when to give up.

    Rejection is a fact of life, I hurts, it’s not fair, but it happens. This week I got some (what I thought was) great thinking rejected. It was backed up by solid evidence, the insight was stinging, but, as is their right, it didn’t chime with their personal opinion so that was that. It’s maddening, frustrating, unfair and, well……

    303530632_a616226e7e_m_2

    But it’s part of being a planner and it’s part of life. You’ll probably go through at least two agencies before you find one that fits. Creatives will refuse to have anything to do with some of you’re briefs, just because they can. And a good chunk of your best thinking will never be used. That’s why I get nervous about criticising other agency’s work, since what runs isn’t their decision alone.

    So what do you do when it happens? Do you sulk and take your bat home? Do you curl into a ball and moan at the unfairness of this cruel world? Do you give up and look for another profession? No you bloody do not. You pick yourself up, be thankful you now know what you have to do to turn it around (find a new idea that will work for someone’s opinion in my case this week) and do something even better.

    Never stop, enjoy the battle, relish the challenge. The end is never as much fun as the start.

    That’s a very Northern view of things of course,  but Yorkshire Grit can be very useful sometimes.

    100_0970_2

  • I bought the Mail on Sunday on, well, Sunday. This was due to Prince’s controversial deal with them, not some new political allegiance, or predilection for ‘blue rinse’ and wistfulness for the Empire.

    I did fleetingly enjoy reading something I disagreed with though. I’m a Guardian/Observer type and while it’s a useful way to get more stuff that’s braodly in line with my views and interests, it’s dangerous only being exposed to stuff that always agrees with you.

    Which brings me neatly to Web 2.0 and Long Tail Niche-ness. It’s lovely to be able to edit your content and choose what information to get, and how to get it. But I wonder if there’s a danger in losing the chance to ever be proven wrong, learn new views or even just get out of your comfort zone. Tribes and personal identity are great, but doesn’t that need to be enriched by debate and experience?

    100_2169_2

    Sometimes you just need to be told you’re being daft, you’re ill informed or just have your horizons broadened. I doubt that comes from more of the same.

  • The ever-wise Scamp hosted a great conversation about Richard Dawkin’s God Delusion recently. There’s some interesting stuff, but I just wanted to add something here which takes it somewhere else.

    For the record, while I think he brilliantly argues for the improbability of a creator that made everything just for us, and the detail he goes into on Darwinism torpedoes ‘Grand Design’, there is a weakness in his central argument of there being little chance of any form of creation at all. And it’s all to do with his brilliant final chapter and how small our frame of reference is.

    200pxthe_god_delusion_uk

    This final section is one of the most inspiring reads I’ve had in a while. He deals with how science can replace the way religion can provide comfort and inspiration.

    We all have a narrow point of view thanks to evolution. We are not equipped to see the very small or the very large. Surface tension on water is irrelevant to us, but massive for a pond skating insect. All matter is mostly empty space, but you cannot see it until you live at the atomic level. A gnat can dodge raindrops with ease, much in the same way as we can dodge cars when we cross the road. We can’t.

    But science is opening up our bandwidth. It’s giving us new possibilities…… and new questions.

    Using light other than ultraviolet allows us to see amazing patterns on flowers, we can see long dead stars too. We’re puzzling with the fact that most matter in the universe is invisible and un-detectable.

    The world becomes strange and bent when you travel near to the speed of light, time itself alters from your perspective. Hard to get your head around.

    Most strangely, when we study the very small, we have to use quantum mechanics, which suggests that the only way we can think of very small things is to assume they are in lots of different places at the same time. It doesn’t make sense to us at all, our minds are not equipped to deal with it……..yet. But it throws up the possibility of multiple universes where every possible event has happened and will happen. Very, very weird.

    There is so much we’re not evolved to understand. So much possibility. How life affirming is that? You don’t need to make up God that made you specially, but doesn’t our lack of comprehension suggest that we can’t even be sure we’re not existing in piece of dust on someone’s mobile phone?

    There’s so much to discover, so much we don’t know and so much we WON’T until our minds evolve to get a new frame of reference. That’s so beautiful, the thought of all those amazing possibilities. Makes me feel faint.

    BUT if our frame of reference is that narrow, if we don’t understand the very small, and we cannot even see, or locate, most of the matter in the universe, how can we claim to have proved logically, or statistically that something hasn’t made it all? We have no concept of scale apart from our own.

    Like I said, this isn’t an argument for and against religion. It’s a someone dazzled by the amazing things we’ve yet to even begin to comprehend.