NORTHERN PLANNER

One of the intrepid entrants on the APSOTW project asked a great question in response to this post and the thought starters on a KOS cultural strategy. Basically, when you have a number of potentially good ideas, how do you decide what to move forward with?

 

The most honest answer is instinct, just like a tennis player just knows what shot to choose after years and years of practise and competition, you find that your instincts are not far wrong.

But here are a few pointers I shared, just in case they're useful (I've changed an example for client confidentiality and the entrants own developing work):

In a real life situation, much depends in the client and the brief you received. Some clients will give you a very specific (usually too much so) brief with a target audience already selected from a segmentation study – usually with lots of information about what they care about within the category and some characteristics, along with a specific communications objective. In this case, the task is to get to know this audience, what they REALLY care about that could be exploited by the brand…and developing a proper role for communications. For example, I once saw a great, ironically shaving example, where the client brief was 'increase penetration amongst hard to reach, style conscious 18-24 years olds who think the shaving category is boring" and the strategy was 'make beards uncool'  (at the time these young proto men were experimenting with goatees which they thought were really hip, while the women they wanted to pull thought it made them look like idiots)

Focused briefs don't come along too often, and you find many strategy presentations therefore have a couple of options, just like creative tends to have two or three 'routes'. Personally, I think this is lazy, but some clients actually expect this. But in any case, some kind of selection needs to made internally and a good planner will be presenting in a manner that helps client 'choose' an, already selected, preferred direction. There is a school of thought built around behavioural economics where you need to give people a choice if yo want them to buy something, just make sure you have two similar things where the one you want them to buy us a little bit better….

 

So………first off what can happen when you look at your different ideas more closely, usually when you put them up on the wall together, is that there's something more fundamental that is driving them. You sometimes see that actually, your strategic routes are, or could be, different campaign ideas for a much deeper brand idea. So I tend to not look at what the best idea is out of the bunch, I look at what connects them.

Of course, this isn't always the case sometimes they are genuinely different ideas with disparate roots, and the ultimate criteria to apply to selection usually boils down to might be:

Is the problem we're solving something enough people could care about? Or could be made to care about? That doesn't mean for example, with my half formed 'assault on pleasure' thoughts that I'd be thinking just about that smallish, cool urban professional type (though I reckon the numbers would be pretty good) I'd be thinking about how many other men would want to be like him, which is quite a lot judging from the stable sales of GQ.

 

Is it provocative? Is it something you can imagine your audience not only agreeing with, but talking about and even debating?

 

Do you honestly think it's something your brand could do credibly? That wonderful Old Spice work is rooted in the truth that it's on old brand that's your Dad probably used buy for example. It doesn't have to be something no other brand could do (it helps though!) because once you own it, you OWN it, but it does need to be credible for YOUR brand to do it – Chrysler isn't the only brand built in Detroit but boy they make the most of the fact it is, it and the way its grit, those 'men of action' are something Americans need as a culture right now .

 

How many battles in the war you want to wage can you see coming from this? For example, that 'assault on pleasure' stuff I was on about could take a stand against the creep of work into our leisure time, it could have a pop at traditional competitive male culture that's all fitting in and pretending to like sport even if yo don't- it could parody men who think it's fun watching football in a freezing stadium while more interesting men are having sex with the kind of women they only dream of, it could make an enemy of Ben Sherman lager louts and the endless routine of the Saturday night out in the same bars and nightclubs, it could stand up for sexual freedom, it could tell 'the man' to get lost "I'll drink as much as I like" etc. I'm not saying this direction is good, but I am saying there are plenty if flashpoints to light. 

And finally, which is simplest? Which can you explain in a sentence, but when you do, it feels like a compression of lots and lots of interesting stuff. A useful way of approaching this is to write 'movie log lines for it' – which are one sentence compressions of, hopefully, very interesting 90 minute films used in the initial pitch. For example, Rocky might have been pitched as ' A washed up boxer gets the chance to fight for the world title, but he must overcome his own demons before he can even think about his opponent". Levis Go Forth stuff could be pitched as "The story of America's youth rebuilding our country with the pioneering spirit that once made it great'

Hope this helps

 

 

 

 

By the way, remember this slightly confused post on cultural strategy for energy drinks? It needed a lot of pruning, which goes to show why you need to think hard about this stuff rather than going off half cocked.

Anyway, here's something a lot simpler.

The energy drinks market is very macho. With the exception of the current Lucozade stuff it's about joy in pain etc, while Lucozade isn't really seen that much in gyms and stuff because it's mostly a lifestyle drink, a fact they've embraced.

There's nothing in the category for women. Who tend to avoid to avoid energy drinks because they think they're full if calories. This is part of something quite rich to delve into.

 

On the practical level, food has become fetishised for body concious young women. Fad diet after fad diet leaves them either half starved from eating next to nothing, or disappointed when they realise the 'cheat diet' that lets them eat what they want doesn't work.

On another level, the macho, no pain sports turns women off. They're not ultra competitive like men, they just want to look good – get into those jeans, work that killer black dress. One of the big trends in health is the increasing desire for physcial perfection. It ain't going away.

That takes us to an interesting place for a watery looking , natural 'good' sports drink. It can puncture all the bullshit around fad diets AND quash the qualms about calories…..basically with the truth that you should burn more than you chew. Instead the the hollow emptiness you get from dieting, if you burn calories instead, you get a wonderful positive buzz.

On a higher level, instead of all that pain, suffering and winning stuff, you could embrace the truth that women train to look great and that is nothing to be ashamed of.

Suddenly you're in a world of independent, sexy, empowered, women who are a million miles away from the crash dieting, famous for doing nothing airheads you see in OK Magazine. 



You're tapping into Generation Y women who don't see a conflict between beauty and brains, see the irony in the glamour industry and enjoy the fact that 'men just don't get it'. They also dislike the 'assault on pleasure' discussed in the last post. They also at once dislike and mock the lunkeads in gyms who can't help but ogle them and don't get why they would never be interested in a million years……….

With some time and effort, that could get quite provocative and interesting………………

So it's over (unless anyone is up for the extra round). I hope everyone found it useful. 

 

Once again, I really want to praise the people that took part. We got a series of great, mostly beautifully written entries with some really good observations. I really got a sense that people were getting a feel for their audience, what they really care about and what that could mean for KOS. Again, I want to impress upon everyone, the entrants showed a level of thinking, empathy and emotional intelligence way beyond what most planners demonstrate.  

The fact that nobody really nailed a truly succinct, watertight presentation isn't and shouldn't be disappointment, only SOME of the best agencies in the world do this stuff really well, and they don't always nail it. This was always intended as a learning experience to get people thinking about this kind of stuff and get a feel for how to go about it. I hope it succeeded to that end.

Anyway, here's one or two things I would have considered if I was looking at this…

Firstly, nearly everybody looked at shaving as a symbol of masculinity and naturally delved into what it could mean to be a man in the 21st century. Great approach of course, when the category is so far behind others in this respect, from Old Spice to Johnnie Walker, from most beer brands to quite a few automotive ones. But then again, when so many brands are providing a variety of outlets for all sorts of tensions in masculine culture, it's really hard to find something new. Doing something similar to another brand outside of shaving, and as well would still have profound effects in such a stilted category, but finding completely new cultural codes instead of a new take on masculine ones would have really interesting.

When shaving is so crassly tied up with being a real man, what else could it be about? For example, the rest of the category is all about space age white hot, NASA, technology (thanks SC) which feels part of the general cultural demand to always keep up with the latest thing, or even worse, take away the need for skill and concentration in favour of convenience . But King of Shaves is proud it was invented in a man's kitchen sink and began with a traditional shaving oil – that could have real meaning for brand that makes shaving an act of authentic concentration and skill, rather than a thoughtless act where man in subservient to technology. You could be quite provocative, delving into the growing cult of the amateur, where people are developing an untapped need to have absorbing hobbies again – things they can do with passion, that require concentration and perseverance, but where learning along the way is as much fun as actually getting there…and it's mostly an intention in life, more than a reality because who has the time? That could be about craft skills, but it could also be about things that actually make you feel something.

Many people picked up on the new quest for physical perfection amongst men. My view is that this part something much deeper. The kind of guys that are embracing the male beauty ideal tend to be young urban professionals – they work hard and play hard, totally embracing experience culture, completely dedicated to having as much damned fun as they can, drinking to excess, partying in cool bars and clubs, lots of sex with hot women and not afraid to embrace the fashion codes that go with it, depillating, smooth skin, immaculate hair, even considering plastic surgery. All the while, where seeing a massive 'assault on pleasure' – promiscuity, drink, eating the wrong foods…our institutions are trying to end the fun and make people behave. How interesting would it be for a set a sub-culture of hedonistic beatiful people against the dull, authoritative mass market – and predictable, one dimensional Gillette guy could be made part of the enemy possibly. Even better, this target gets irony, they love sophisticated, multi-layer comedy and culture that others just don't get – how great would it to be to mount protest your enemy doesn't even understand?

Back on manliness, I wonder if there's more in transformation culture? Many picked up on the confusing variety of roles men are asked to play these days. Rather than fight this, why not embrace it?  Much of the feminine codes you see out there are about women playing with their identity. Maybe it's time to be the brand that does this for men? Shaving, as many points out, seems to fight against new masculine ideals and preserve the classic male- why not smash it by embracing the new masculinity, where different mindsets and seemingly contradictory behaviours are not hyocrisy or schizophrenia, they're embracing the modern man who has as many sides to his identity as a woman and wants to explore this and the possibilities it represents. You see it in the way fashion has become less about the diktats from the fashion police and more a huge selection of styles and identities to mix, match and try on. That might lead to the The staid corporate stooge who goes base jumping at the weekend. The loving, dependable single Dad who's also the ladykiller. The reason superheroes tend to have a human alter ego is because it touches a deep need in most people to be someone else from time to time, or even just vent that part of yourself that never comes out very often. I find it funny that much of modern feminist culture is about independence and self actualisation when that luxury isn't, at least in the popular culture we see, afforded to men. Don Draper's identity crises don't strike a chord because they're abnormal, but because they're all too common.

I'd argue that much of why people connect with the Bourne Identity or the new James Bobd movies is the way the complex, conflicted, ambiguous and, in the case of Bourne, multi identity characters reflect tension in their own lives.

What about women? KOS is launching Queen of Shaves. In culture, women are loving invading previously male only citadels (apparently the biggest growth area for motorcyle sales is women) – instead of the seriously crap Gilette Venus stuff:

 

Why not champion Generation Y women invading the mans world? Most brands treat young women as idiots, why not embrace their dizzying march?

Oh, and one final thing. Young men feel rather helpless right now. The category not only shows them a world of success that's out if reach, it's one dimensional men with nothing about them. Right now, they feel helpless, listless and without any control in their own lives. This especially acute with 2o somethings who have been sold a pup by culture- the fake rich beatiful MTV lifestyle and the promise that of they worked hard and buckles down, they could have great jobs and great lives with the houses, cars and fantastic leisure pursuits that go with it. But most of them are finding the jobs are not there, and end if working in boring, repetitive jobs, call centres admin, or some even have to take a McJob. Even the successful ones feel they've sold out to the man and wish for something for meaningful. That's the deep need expressed in Fight Club

 

and even Wanted-

 

young men looking for outlets, for a way to feel control in their own lives. As James whatsisface says at the end of Wanted (dreadful film, but still).."What the fuck did you do today?". Yes it's youth rebellion, but I wonder what outlets – naturally safer and less silly than bare knuckly fighting or teaming up with Ms Jolie to kill people – KOS could provide. You only have look at culture jamming or the student protests in the UK to see there's something to tap into here. Maybe it's even showing that a life of significance doesn't revolve around how much money you earn and being the corporate guy, it comes from being a 'man of action' rather than words?

Anyway, just some rough, half formed channels of interest. Please rip them apart at will.

 

So, with the exception of Gareth, who's feedback will appear as a kind of epilogue in due course, I have the task of going last. Bugger.

That means it's a struggle to say anything that hasn't been said before and you've all probably lost interest by now. Oh well.

I need to apologise though. This post is late – after entries being on time and the kind effort of (most of) the judges to be on time – and I'm sorry. The last week has been crazy, not an excuse, a reason I hope.

Right.

First, there are the thankyous. Thanks to the judges for giving their time on this. But more importantly, thanks to the people who submitted their entries. Hopefully, you'll benefit from the direct feedback, but it's incredibly generous to give your time and expose yourself in this manner so that the others, who didn't, might benefit from the comments and pointers too. Seriously, I salute you.

Right, onwards. Here's my general feedback. At the heart of this project is a conflict. I've banged on before about the weakness of slavishly following proprietary planning processes, yet lo! I set out a distinct process for this one. Why on earth would I do that? Because this was never going to be an easy project. It flies in the face of most of the accepted wisdom in some of the, ahem, most respected organisations in this business..product or emotional benefit focus I mean. So I thought it useful to provide a guide to help and, hopefully, case studies that brought it to life.

Another reason was that, like it or not, we always have to tailor how we deliver our ideas to clients: the way they think about how brands work and their sign off process. Practising organising your thinking to help someone buy it is something you need to start doing.

So I was a little surprised that not everyone followed the brief. I don't mean following the process in a linear order, but making sure that you covered the main questions, so that my imaginary tick list was complete (you'd be amazed in pitches how many clients have a real tick list). First and foremost in any presentation, you need to be thinking about what your audience is looking for and tailor it to that.

With regards to presentation style, it really varied from the too succinct to virtual verbal diarrhoea. I wanted to see a clear story told in an inspiring way. There were wonderful examples of design, brilliant pieces of writing and, in places, crystal clarity. No one entry did it all in one go. What works for me, whether it's writing a document, preparing for a presentation or whatever is writing down the story first. Literally, the elevator pitch.Usually that means a one pager. Ever since I read Perfect Pitch I've followed the advice and organise it as Robert McKee suggests: The Inciting Incident that sets it all in motion, Progressive Complications, Crisis, Climax and Resolution. It works for me and is well worth a go. Once you have this, fleshing it out is easy, but you have that critical structure.

Now for the content. Specifically the approaches to cultural strategy. Every single entry has at least one gem of an observation, but it tended to feel that most of your efforts had gone into finding a category convention ( and done this brilliantly) which is critical of course, and less so the genuine tension tension in culture you could resolve…in many ways it felt like people were tapping into a mainstream trend to break a category convention rather than resolve real tension in people's lives. That said, nearly everybody showed a direction of thinking that was fresher and more thought provoking than 90% of what most planners would do and 100% fresher than existing category stuff. It just felt a little like piggybacking a trend at times, rather than repurposing something beginning to get momentum in culture that no one else has yet.

LIke I said, there were some fantastic observations about category conventions, some great directions about what was going on in mens REAL lives we could address, plus some great thoughts about what was going on in culture we could repurpose. But I never felt that that all that happened in one entry. I was also a little bit disappointed that so many approaches addressed a question about what masculinity should be about, when a more interesting question might be, WHY is shaving so tied up with masculinity and manliness, starting there might have got to somewhere very different.

The biggest category convention seems to be that shaving is tied up with masculinity – what else could it be about?

So well done all, but no one was perfect. Which is a relief since I bet the judges don't want to be ousted by the Young Turks just yet.

So to the entries:

 Zelico

Short and to the point. Interesting to focus on the category convention of the clean shaven guy…but I was looking for more than this, what it is it in life/culture this means/could mean? What's wrong with the clean shaven guy and the way brands focus on him?

The 'creative guy' is interesting but what's BEHIND this, what's the tension in men's lives championing the loose creative types could resolve? How and why could this be any different to Apple's 'tools for creatives'? I wonder if digging into further might have exposed something like the 'weekend hippy' – the young guy who hasn't come to terms with the constraints of adulthood yet. That night have got to a place that talks about shaving at weekends – or providing 'outlets' during the week.

Still,  didn't entirely agree with other judges that encouraging blokes to shave less is a bad thing – most strategy doesn't change behaviour, it tends to change brand preference, and I wonder if providing 'cultural capital' to your audience might generate that 'switch' without actually making them shave more or less. Also, there night be all sorts of tactics for helping guys shave off a thicker beard, I bet shaving oil helps with that (just out of interest, I was amazed nobody dug into KOS heritage a little bit more, which the oil is the bedrock).

Independent art IS interesting and I can see how you might supply 'cultural trickledown' to guys with the interest but not the palate or the time and effort to seek it out, but you don't really show how you make it relevant to KOS.

So there's lots going on here but I wonder if you audacious attempt at striking brevity left out the story that would pull it together. Beautifully written manifesto, but the brief said it should inspire anyone in the KOS business and, to be honest, it's a little oblique.

On final point – I loved the idea of craven mediocrity- guys who want to be great but don't really have the chops (most of us then) would loved to have seen this developed more.

Matt

Points for actually following the process.  I like what you do with the category- it's great to see challenger strategy applied. It's great for you to look for inspiration from other categories, but it worries me at this stage, as this category is already very functional to me, it just dresses it in emotional benefit bollocks.

I really liked where you were going, but you frustrated me by stopping short of looking at cultural conventions in the category. It felt like you were judging their ads not what what their content might really represent. The smug self satisfied guy is interesting but what is it about him you can bring meaning to and subvert? I do love that you go for inspiration from popular culture, bit ads.

For me though, your cultural tension misses a crucial point, you state the category doesn't connect with real guys, but you go no further. What is it about these fake men that might be made to piss guys off? This what I'm thinking at this point as your story unfolds and wanted you to push it further.

But I LOVE your manifesto I see how grown up mischief helps you play judo with Gillete. But you haven't shown why robomen are such a problem. You just say that's not what real guys are like- but what's wrong with out of touch images to aspire to? If they don't aspire to this image WHY NOT? You haven't said or I'm missing something.

So I'm frustrated becasue I thought what you were driving at with your Hangover/Mad Men references was great..something about the boiling tensions in men forces to conform, just waiting to explode. I would have loved to see how you would light the touchpaper.

On your executions,I wanted to see where you might show up to have maximum impact, where your 'tension' would be the most intense. The fashion store thought is interesting, but where and how could you be the most provocative?

Justin

Great start, you're wetting my appetite – the best presentations make the audience sit up and take notice from the first second. I like you getting quickly to the functional relationship with the category – shaving's a pain in the arse and part of a much wider ritual of pretending to be someone else when you go to work. This was really going somewhere. You really link the category to a wider issue in life.

Then you lose me.

Your solution seems to add to the problem in my view – getting a proper shave. That feels like an answer to a different problem, possibly the way men might yearn for the days when men where men, but you didn't lead to this and then, to be honest, you seem to descend into lots of functional stuff, which makes it feel like an FMCG planning deck of yore rather than a cultural strategy. A real shame because you started brilliantly.

Carolin

I like your quote at the start, but be careful, if I had a penny for every planning presentation I'd seen that starts with a quote..and then the proverbs approach gets stale quickly and gets in the way of me understanding what you're trying to say!

The archetypes approach was great, it's a fresh way to look at what the category does/doesn't do. But I've got to be honest, I got confused. I THINK you're saying the world confusing for a certain kind of guy who thinks culture has left him behind – it wants him to be many, conflicting things when he just wants be himself, uncomlicated, dependable, nice. I really wanted this developed, but you don't really link it to why the category exacerbates this. I think you've found something really great to pursue, but you don't pull this through to relevance to shaving. 

I'm thinking you're saying nice guys shave because it shows you care about the woman you love, and helps build the uncool, family driven life these guys want. This gets me back on track but then you bamboozle me with your process chart, which seems very different to the process laid out in the brief.

I work at it and tease out what I think you means, the category is about the alpha male, our men like the backyard life. I'm loving this – love, not lust, home to boardroom. I wish you'd made this clearer because it's great.

Also, really smart to start a conversation between men and women, since I bet a massive chunk of razors are bought by women for their partner.

I really wanted you to develop this more rather than muddy it with the 'shave because your partner prefers it', Gillete have done this and yes, you suggest a different wrapping, but it's rather old hat to tell men women prefer men to be stubble free. I really wanted you to push the 'backyard guy' who doesn't have to try too hard, or make the loving family man cool.

But you really needed to develop this a lot more. Because while the category doesn't champion nice guys (but I do wonder if the old Gillette the Best a Man Can Get did) culture does. From 'My Family' in the UK to the dependable Dad who seems to be the bedrock of US popular culture – sitcom, dramas even movies. I'll wager the VW Star Wars commercial is all about making family guys feel good about themselves.

Love your video manifesto though. So really great thoughts, but be clear and hone and really push your story.

SC

LOVE your title, just love it. You get going quickly and a big tick for nailing category conventions swiftly. I think the 'macho ritual is an interesting springboard as it 'NASA 7 blade crap'…but what is the deeper cultural orthodoxy beneath this? I doubly wanted this because your analysis of the cultural mess that is men's vanity was great – the shift from looking good being once pansy, now pre-requisite.  Within those archetypes, part of me wanted you to settle on one and challenge it – bondi beach guy? hpister? Which one?

But I liked you nailed it into simple cultural tension (not everybody did this!) – real world body image  pressures v Hollywood's achievement over image.

I'm in a quandry though. You've said some really stimulating stuff, but I don't think you've linked the category behaviour to you cultural need–I agree the category shows an outdated version of what it means to be a man, but you haven't really showed how this links to the body image observations. I'd argue in many ways it doesn't since much of the category behaviour arguably says, forget all that nonsense, just shave well and it's job done.

Perhaps I'm being picky. I can see that it's probably enough to say the category doesn't accept that the world has moved and needs a new ideology in world where men's roles and self image are confusing. But you don't state this clearly enough.

I still struggle with your tension point. I'm not sure Hollywood says achieving is good. Your examples, geeks and slackers are very niche subcultures and I'm not sure either is about achievement. In my view, the geek thing seems to be about nice guys finishing first while Apatows slackers seem to be NON-achievers finally growing up.

All of this is really thought provoking though,  wish you'd taken it to the next level and tied together more.

You don't take me with you the rest of the way though. The thought of guys who feel life makes it hard to get to where their old man got is great, but it's not really linked to what you've said before.

Then you manifesto is beautiful. I THINK you are really on about resolving the tension between men who want to live up to what's expected of them…looks, achievements, but it's hard in the face of realism about their looks and talents and the way women are winning in the schoolroom, workplace and culture at large.

You get to shifting the centre of gravity from success as perfection to character, wit and, well, being interesting. Comedy and Apatow's films make great source material, wonderful finish but I wish you'd taken me there rather than making me work so hard!

Geert

Top marks for art direction but you really need to take more time to write a lot less! Seriously, edit, precis, distil. Please!!!!!!!!
Nice distilation of shaving as the world of the classical man, nice how you show this is aout of step with blurred gender roles and how it leads to slacking and underachievement. This is great.

Really good observation that blokes are squandering more freedom and opportunity than they've ever had before.

But your Ivy League solution does't feel like the solution! I t felt like you were saying at first men need to start making life happen rather than waiting for it to happen to them. I like this, but I'm looking for a provocative call to arms to mobilise blokes in the first place.

I'm not denying Ivy league Man is a good idea, but it feels like in icon for men who have already decided to act, you need to convince them to get off their arses in the first place

Thomas

I love that you've gone right into shave culture, not just brand culture. Your pace and style begin really well. Great tension I thought – the submissive man who does what he's told, leaving most men just getting angry and a great opportunity to embrace a much wider identity and all the possibilities that brings. Really good.

But your strategy suffers from lace of the pace and brevity in your first bit! I was really with you, but then I get less sure about 'good men' as a name for a target, it's not great when you're talking about men who embrace the best of where they've been and where they could go. 'Good doesn't encapsulate that for me!

But i LOVE the idea of the evolution of new generation, "One day we will all be like this' if feels like a grand vision, a shared goal.

I wish you had captured the essence of what that might be, but if feels like your solution is more about embracing the old than the new. I wanted to see more possibility.

Your manifesto was beautifully written but I don't think you've captured what your thinking could have been, it begins to feel like inspiring progress' which is a great, relevant idea for a male audience, except for the fact Johnnie Walker have already done it!!

The Strategy

Your post starts really well. That quote is a killer. I like how you boil the category down to 'success' and targeting 'men before they become men' is wonderful, in the face of the men in the category all too sure of who they are.

But then you go 'all planner' on me. It looks very clever but I want you to be clear and inspiring, I've sat through too many planning presentations that try and be too clever, be simply great. Please.

I'd be careful of using rebellious codes- from Levis to Pepsi it's the most pilfered approach to youth there is.

I don't you're actually saying this really, you're saying do as many things as you can, try stuff, decide what you like and who YOU want to be. I wish you'd pursued this further and linked it back to a credible role for KOS. You don't do this really.

I also wanted you to show me what kind of tactis KOS might use, and tbought showing up at universities wasn't really enough. Plus, what about the mllions of young me who DON'T go?

So, that's all the entries. I hope you can see that EVERY entry has moments of brilliance, but ultimately there wasn't one where there was a totally coherent, watertight cultural strategy. Don't be disheartened, you all did great…and better than most so called 'seasoned' planners. The level of analysis, instinct and overall thinking was great. But again, I urge you to think about your story and always try and dig underneath why what you've observed is important.

So who wins? I'm going to be controversial and say no one. Like I saidm everyone was brilliant in one place or other, some found some great cultural tensions but didn't really provide a credible solutions, others provided great cultural ideas but didn't really show what deep cultural need they were helping with.

So.

There's a tie breaker round if you're up for it. 14 days from today I want you distill your thinking into a creative brief. Imagine your strategy has been signed off by the client. Imagine they've signed it off with some concerns along the lines of the above comments, but like where you're going and want to sign off a brief to put into creative. I want you to write a shit hot brief that will make any creative desperate to pick up their layout pad and start work on a big creative idea. The format is up to you – I'll supply reference of agency briefs if you need it.

Judging this time will just be done by me. It will be 30% based in how you develop your strategy and 70% based on a clear, succinct, inspiring brief.

Up for that?

Any questions, let me know. Any challenges to the feedback, likewise.

Off you go.

Okay, so we're nearly there with judges feedback. I'm still waiting for poor Gareth to share his, but he's under the cosh at the moment, Depending on how he does, we'll either share his feedback before the end, this week, or sum up share Gareth's after. Either way, we'll conclude this week.

Here's Rob Campbells. He's been thorough and he's been honest. One thing I want you take in is that he's Planning Director at Weiden and Kennedy Shanghai. I don't mean, listen to him because he's a senior person at an organisation most of us would probably like to work at the most,I mean look at the rigour. I sometimes think that the so called, 'cooler' more creative agencies do themselves a disservice by not exposing the utter mania for rigorous, watertight thinking. All the great work you see isn't just a result of a mania for doing great creative work, it's about taking care of the detail. Take the famous Old Spice work. It's probably as creative and provocative as an integrated campaign gets, but don't forger it was done for P&G – one the most notoriously formulaic, risk averse clients there is. You don't get any work through clients like that, especially work like this without proven rigorous thinking. There's a case study here in case you're interested:

So apart from the feedback itself, take in the fact that the most groundbreaking agencies get to the work they do by having coffee and being wacky. They work very hard and don't anything leave the building until it's as good as it can be. That goes for a strategy presentation as much as it goes for rough storyboard or a finished film.

Here's Rob's feedback:

 

OK, so before I go on to individual submissions, a general overview:

 

The range of entries – at least in duration – was very varied.

 

Some were very to the point whereas some seemed to go on for so long that when I got to the end, I had to re–look at them because I genuinely thought I'd missed a page explaining what they were trying to say.  

 

NONE, were very clear.

 

They either used 1,000 words when 100 would do or used 10 when 100 was needed. [Those number are obviously just to prove my point, I don't mean it literally – just incase John Dodds reads this] I would suggest everyone hands their preso over to someone not in the industry to read. Preferably their mums or dads. If they can understand it, fantastic – if they can't, look at how you're talking, framing or telling the story again.

 

Another thing was that all of them didn't title their submission in a way that started selling me their 'view' from the get-go.

 

I absolutely detest bland titles like "KING OF SHAVES ASSIGNMENT".

 

It might sound like a little thing, but you want to start guiding people down your path of thinking from the moment you see it and only one person did it [and even then it wasn't that good] – a tragedy.

 

Also, I know it should be about substance over style … but that should not mean you don't put any design element into it.

 

Pages of text don't encourage you to read it.

 

Sure, in a perfect world, that shouldn't matter  – but people still want to be engaged and entertained. They need to be kept interested and how you present your work has a very important role to play – not least, to ensure your submission gets the attention and focus it is due.

 

A couple of the presentations were good, but sadly, the layout – or flow – was so disparate that all the good energy they built up started dying within a few pages.

 

Finally, I'd say that my overall view is the people who submitted their assignments didn't quite get the challenge.

 

That sounds unfair because it's obvious a lot of work went into the submissions – however I can't help but in some cases, they were more about showing they'd done a lot of work rather than they'd truly grasped what you were saying.

 

In most cases, I felt they were still focusing too much on trying to be different from the category rather than coming up with something that infiltrated, changed or created culture – which highlights a need for the industry as a whole to step away from focusing all their energies on celebrating what's new and cool and get back to highlighting the values of some of the fundamentals.

 

Again, that sounds harsh – especially as I know a lot of people who are doing planning at a senior level who wouldn't have come up with something as good as some of these guys – however I guess I was just disappointed overall because nothing really grabbed me by the balls and screamed "THIS IS IT".

 

Gareth once said [or it might of been – god forbid – Andy] that the key is to find "unexpected relevance" and sadly I didn't find any.

 

A cultural tension point is like a crossroads, where there is a mass of energy all congregated, waiting for one of the other doors to be opened and let liberation or – at the least – validation to be released. I didn't feel the tension point the submissions highlighted really got under the skin of the audience, they were either more a CATEGORY tension point or amplifying what the media has been promoting in terms of gender attitudes and issues. 

 

Some entries definitely have potential … some are better than others … however if I was KOS and looking for a direction to create culture rather than just reflect it, I think I'd still be putting my business out to pitch because at the end of the day, as much as everyone mocks Gillette, they're the market leader by a country mile [admittedly, aided by their incredible distribution] and I'm sure the objective for KOS wold be to give the major players a real run for their money, not just give the public an alternative positioning.

 

OK, so that's the overview errrrrm, over – now to the specifics.

 

Given the amount of judges comments you'll of got, I'm going to be very efficient by just highlighting key points rather than go into detail for each entry.

 

 

THE STRATEGY:

 

I liked 'boys must figure out who they are to become a man'. I liked it a lot. 

 

And I liked the idea of targeting younger men – men before they were men – but then it ended up like a wet weekend in Cleethorpes for me. I don't buy the justification – it sounds like someone trying desperately to look academic and while it may be true, I come away going "so what".

 

Also, the 'bringing it to life' section at the end just didn't capture my imagination. It said nothing – and this is a point where they could have made me feel their idea and overcome many of my views. Sadly they didn't do that as well as they could have. Or should have.

 

When I saw the 'mission' chart, I was interested, by the end I was disappointed. 

 

 

ZELJKO:

 

I like Zeljko a lot, but this isn't one of their best submissions.

 

It feels a bit lazy to be honest … in terms of the background, strategy and ideas.

 

And the thing that pisses me off [and yes, I mean that expression] is the lyrics to the manifesto has some lovely stuff in there – stuff that had the potential to be a really interesting foundation for what KOS could be … certainly more innovative than the 3rd rate Converse territory that was submitted.

 

I don't know what happened, but I'm guessing Zeljko was busy and pulled this together at the last moment. Kudos for the commitment, detention for the content.

 

 

THOMAS:

 

I absolutely love "The Gillette-shaved man isn't exactly a

realistic, interesting or multilayered guy. And once he 

does 'interesting' things, he gets axed." Fantastic summation that made me smile and nod at the same time.

Took long enough to get to that point, but like a great joke, the punchline delivered.

 

Please don't use terms like 'he-cession', especially when the word you are raping doesn't really reflect the point you're trying to make.

 

My problem with this submission is it feels like the Chivas Regal campaign – Be Chivalrous.  

 

I know it's not, I know what Thomas is saying is different, but I can't help but feel this is more like the evolution of Gillette man than something that captures the spirit of the times. 

 

I agree that the rebellious angle wouldn't work long term [ala Right Wing voting tools] but the direction being presented doesn't make my gut feel it's something that reflects a genuine cultural tension point – something that would touch people in the same way that listening to Al Pacino's 'Any Given Sunday' speech or watching Wieden's  'Chrysler Superbowl' spot made them feel – even if they were about as far away from the 'core target audience' as you could get.

 

Thorough background, nicely paced – but sadly, once it got to the strategy, I felt it lost direction, energy and interest. Sorry Thomas.

 

 

MATT:

 

Matt's preso was a bit like Thomas'.  

 

Lot's of great background, a couple of awesome observations [

“The smug look is more 

post-coital than posts-have”] but ultimately a conclusion that feels like you've just won 3rd prize in the office lottery.

To be fair, the manifesto kind of worked – it was still way too category focused for my liking – but then when I read his 'what mischief is/isn't', I went away disappointed because I felt I was reading some words to describe a pseudo-wannabe status beer brand, not a shaving company that wanted to put mischief on a pedestal. 

 

Some of the activation ideas were OK [retail location for example, for exactly the reason he states] however I felt what Matt was trying to do was 'upmarket Virgin' but without the charisma or wit and given the heart of his idea was mischief, I would have hoped he would of been far braver in what he put forward.

 

JUSTIN:

 

Errrrm, no.

 

His 2nd page had a bunch of stuff that could have been explored [albeit, category observations] but turning KOS into KOSkin doesn't answer the brief, even if it could be argued it could drive significant revenue growth. Which I doubt. 

 

I just don't think Justin really understood the task – but seriously good on him for having a go and I hope once he's read the comments of all the judges and the feedback as a whole, he understands where he might have gone wrong and is hungry to rub our faces in the shit on the next assignment. 

 

In all honesty, nothing would make me happier.

 

 

CAROLIN:

 

Like Thomas, Carolin has identified the everyday good guy, the man who is decent, hardworking and honourable.

 

And, like Thomas, she has expressed it in a way that feels more like a [boring] category differentiation than a cultural tension point … even though 'the role and purpose of man' is something that is very much is the collective consciousness.  

 

There is obviously something there, however I can't help but feel they've only scratched the surface as regards what this tension point really is/means and as such, have ended up in an area that feels generic rather than liberating.

 

The preso was also way too cluttered – I'm sure it would have been better if Carolin had presented it herself [I know for a fact she's very good at that] however in powerpoint form, it just seemed to make giant leaps that didn't really flow.

 

 

GEERT:

 

Best laid out preso of the lot but 45 pages is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long, especially when each page is written in 2 columns!

 

Christ, I overwrite on my blog, but Geert takes it to a new level.

 

While Geert's overview was in a similar vein to everyone else's, he did it with a style and humour that lifted it from the others. Saying that, he wrote so damn much that there was more than one occasion where I was left wondering 'what the point' of a particular slide was and even now, I still am questioning how he went from the interesting 'gender blending' shift into the 'IVY LEAGUE MAN' territory.

 

I sort-of buy the idea, but I still feel he came to it because of existing brands going into that area [even if they're not in the shaving category] than a deep understanding of how to create/change culture due to a  recognition of undercurrent tension points.

 

Like everyone else, he has gone for quantity rather than quality in how to bring his idea to life … however, given he actually has an idea, it has allowed him to explore concepts without losing the heart of what he is trying to make KOS represents.

 

My only point on this is that while being able to show your strategy/idea has real depth and legs, coming up with 10,000 ideas doesn't always do you justice. 

 

Amongst all the things LEVIS did to launch 'GO FORTH', the 'write your own declaration of independence' and Braddock brought it all to life way more than the countless other things that were done and I would suggest in future, people highlight 1 or 2 'shop window' ideas they have – and then maybe detail some of the other concepts – rather than list lots and lots of things and give them all equal billing.

 

Does that make sense? Probably not, oh well …

 

 

SC:

 

I am left in a quandary with SC's entry.

 

While I think it gives a general overview to a bunch of things, I think there's parts that are very 'light' and parts that take massive jumps [Geeks to comedians?]  

 

Not only that, her manifesto reeks of a remake of the Apple 'Crazy One's' ad and some of her 'findings' are open to massive interpretation, and yet her

 comedian thing really interests me … it's just I am not really sure how she got there and how it exists beyond just creative execution.

Shame, because if she could link it all together better for me [or for her] she would have something that could really made me think about KOS going somewhere new, however I am left wondering how they ended up there.