NORTHERN PLANNER

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.

 

 

 

Thomas Wagner

 

Some interesting thoughts in there.

 

Did a nice job of building a picture of the sort of man who would reject Gillette, but I wasn’t as sure how King of Shaves were going to capture these people’s imagination. Perhaps he should have gone back to Connery and co and shown what they would have said about KOS.

 

The just enough is more part also seemed to come out of nowhere a bit for me. I wasn’t quite sure how this fitted with the rest of the story.

 

 

Matt Nixon – Mischief

 

Builds a good story of why mischief could stand out in the category. I think it needs to be defined what/who they’re being mischievous against though. Is it the old representations of men, is it the dull and characterless? Without this clear agenda for their mischief, it’s hard to anticipate and support what they do.

 

 

Zeljko

 

I quite like the idea of KOS/Shaving helping to fuel creativity. It fits quite well with the product and usage situation, but I think it could be better defined what the tension is. Funding indie films seems a little safe and predictable, which is perhaps because it’s not clear why they’re fighting against the status quo?

 

Also, the song lyric manifesto was a bit too abstract for my uncultured brain.

 

 

Justin Thor Hoyer

 

Unfortunately, I think this presentation is let down by not defining, or at least not showing evidence for the key insight/behaviour KOS is going to take advantage of. The idea of poor shaving being a problem, or mocked seems a small point at the start of the presentation, but appears to be the basis of the whole idea. This could have done with some substantiation – even just a few Twitter quotes or something.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carolin Dahlman

 

Interesting contrast to the standard shaving ads. I think it could have done with being clearer about the reasons the ‘good guys’ would use KOS. Was it to help them get their loving wife, or was it a kind of selfless act to make their home life happier? If it’s the first, then it may need more direction on how the advertising would differ from the usual ‘woman stroking the man’s beard after the shave’ imagery.

 

Bonus points for Tom Selleck.

 

In terms of presentation, it’s quite hard to follow the early slides, as the info jumps around the page.

 

There’s also a lot of quotes and thoughts at the start, which it might have been nice to apply next to the new direction at the end of the presentation. To show the challenges set had been answered. That may just be my style though!

 

 

SC

 

Feels a bit like a male version of Dove, which is not necessarily a bad thing, and humour is probably the right way to tackle the subject for men.

 

However, I’m not sure some of the activity described actually lives up to the manifesto. It feels like you’d be owning comedy, rather than necessarily comedy with a purpose, as the manifesto suggests.

 

While I wouldn’t say Powerpoint is always the answer, I think this response suffered without pictures to reinforce the audience and idea.

 

 

GJBaltus

 

I quite liked the idea of returning to traditional, timeless qualities in an age of uncertainty.

 

The end of the manifesto and some of the event activity are what got me most interested – providing support and opportunities to build character. I’m less comfortable with the bits about determination to be successful, just because I started picturing the usual Gillette ads in my head. I’m sure this wasn’t what they had in mind though.

 

Probably my favourite presentation, because I could really see people getting behind a brand that genuinely helps people to build character and experience, rather than just hold up pictures of people who have already made it. It also feels like an area a shaving brand could legitimately own – it being one of the first steps into manhood.

 

It’s also a lovely looking Powerpoint. It shouldn’t matter, but it does…

 

My one criticism would be that it was perhaps a touch too long – a few she-male slides could have been cut, and the length means it’s even more important that the key positioning/insight statements are made clear and given room to breath. I only truly understood the positioning on the second read through because of this. It may not get that chance in the real world.

 

 

The Strategy

 

I don’t know if it was the format, but I found it really hard to pick out the key ideas in this one. Perhaps it needed a bit more editing to make sure all the ideas were pointing in the same direction and told one story.

 

I think there was the basis of a good idea in young men just wanting to get shaving out of the way, to enjoy better things, but I found the whole thing quite confusing.

 

Maybe I was just being stupid though.

So here's another round of judges' feedback. Jason's obviously taken time to be thorough, constuctive,  point to what's working and what needs working on.

General comments:
First off I have to commend everyone who had the guts to submit something – I think it’s amazing that so many of you took the time and energy to take an honest crack at this, in your spare time, and to open yourself up to judgment and criticism. It’s not an easy thing to do for anyone, let alone earlier in your career. Seriously – you each have my heartfelt respect for that.

Overall, I have a couple of observations.

One is that while there was some good solid thinking in each of the entries, many seemed to miss the point of the exercise. Andrew gave you something very specific to do. Cultural Strategy is not just about finding something that is culturally relevant (all marketing should really do that to some degree or another). It is about finding a lightning rod to provoke debate & conversation, to insert the brand into popular discourse. It’s not just about finding an insight into people’s feelings towards a category. It’s about finding reservoirs of deep, strong emotion – passion, frustration, anger, disappointment, joy – which are untapped and unspoken in the category and in popular culture. Most of you didn’t do that.

The other is the importance of really giving some thought to how you set up and sell your idea. Several of the entries buried a lot of the smart bits under too much explanation and discussion. Some exposition is fine, but be crystal clear what you’re saying and what you want people to remember. Remember your readers and judges will read 10 of these in a row. So don’t be afraid to be didactic. Clearly call out your key thoughts, even repeat and summarize them. Otherwise your big ideas might get lost. Another benefit of being didactic is it reminds yourself to follow all the steps and the rules – which a few entries didn’t do.

Zeljko

 

So – your submission is incredibly succinct. Which can be a good thing.  I like that you were brave enough to submit it in a short, simply written style and avoided an elaborate deck. But in this case, sorry to be harsh, it mostly felt like you weren’t trying that hard. I’m not sure if you were going for an off-the-cuff style or just didn’t have much time to work on it, but it all came across as dashed off and not totally thought through.

 

You made a lot of observations and conclusions that had no evidence or examples behind them. Which is too bad because you had a few nice ideas for sure. I think the cultural shift you identify – basically the rise of the creative class – is true and has potential, but it unravels from there. I think I get why you went to “celebrating the occasional shave” as a territory. But celebrating people for not using your products very often is a difficult strategy to pull off, especially for a premium priced brand that needs to build up sales momentum. That’s not to say you can’t feature guys with facial hair – see Thomas’ entry for a different approach to featuring guys with beards. Also, your tactics felt superficial. Supporting independent creative content is a basic idea, and there are a lot of brands doing that today. I didn’t get the exactly how KOS would do it to fit the idea and the brand.  So overall I didn’t get the sense of how you would create a real cultural impact.

 

And then your manifesto didn’t seem to really fit with the rest of it.  The idea of using song lyrics as a manifesto is a nice one. Music can be a powerful shortcut to help bring people along. But the lyrics you chose are darker and have more conflict and edge than the rest of your submission. And in that I think there’s a missed opportunity. You could have explored some of the themes in the song more deeply – lines like “woke up in the nightmare world of craven mediocrity” and “calling into question virtue gone to seed” have all by themselves the potential for some really interesting cultural strategy.

 

 

Matt

Overall this felt like some solid, basic planning. Nothing that really blew me away, but a good start. Adopting a challenger brand strategy is a decent place to start with a brand like this. However you didn’t really go into that too much, you mostly talked just about the need to generate strong preference. There are a lot of good other useful principles and rules behind how to activate challenger brands which you could have tapped into further. Read Adam Morgan’s book Eating the Big Fish if you haven’t already.

Mischief is a nice territory. I would have mentioned earlier in your strategy setup that you drew some inspiration from how the brand and the founder are already behaving (like the King’s Speech video), rather than leaving that as an afterthought in the tactics.  That helps ground the strategy in something really authentic to the brand. And I’m very glad you talked about the founder. It’s interesting that more submissions didn’t mention him, there’s usually some great cultural fodder in the founders of a company like this.

Some of your creative work was a let down – the pogo sticks and fight club stuff felt gimmicky and inauthentic. But I thought the “grow down” idea has great potential. “Removing the signs of growing up” is actually a very big cultural insight that I think you could have done a lot more with.

The last couple of thoughts around keeping the conversation open through fast mischievous takes on current events have potential to be great tactics. They are using (as Faris would say) cultural latency to your advantage in a way bigger corporations usually find hard to do.  I would have liked to see you explore that and its implications a bit more.

And really glad to see that you gave a bit of thought to retail, that’s such an important point of activation for a brand like this. And one we often don’t give enough thought to.

 

Justin

 

So I like that you did some good planner basics – looking at barriers to usage, identifying potential target audiences, and being brave enough to put some specific numbers behind your objectives. That’s always very refreshing to see so thank you for that.

But overall it was disjointed, more like a collection of observations and thoughts than a cohesive argument. And most importantly, the thing that the brief focused on, the cultural strategy part, was really weak. You focused on the shaving behaviours, but not on their role in and connection to broader culture. I didn’t see a real idea, or what the cultural shift was, what your ideology was, what your manifesto was. So it came across more like a brand manager’s brief to the agency than as a strategist’s point of view. You didn’t really follow the rules. And the first rule of an assignment like this is always, before you do anything else, ANSWER THE BRIEF.

 

Carolin

 

Overall you did a really good job. You had me from the first slide. I really liked your intro quotes and there was a simple but powerful logic to the way you explored the target and the category landscape.  The cultural shifts around the changing definitions of being a man, roles of the sexes in relationships, and of changing focus from facial hair to body hair, are all great territories.  With the ‘good guy’ target you have identified a nice cultural space to build on. 

Having set everything up really well, I would have liked to see you go even deeper in the ideology and your manifesto video. I think you could get more specific on why and how hair gets in the way of the good guy’s dream of connection and love. And I bet if you did think a bit more about that, you could find some rich ideas that would create some cultural impact. Your activation tactics were a bit light, but as a planner the strategic work is the most important and you did all the right stuff.

 

 

SC

 

Nice job on this one, a good logic taking us through the thinking. And I find a well-written prose argument to be a nice break from glossy PowerPoint sometimes, so thank you for that.

I like that you took on the packaging as a touchpoint. Not something that we think about enough, or that we just take as a given which can’t be changed (although of course the reality is it can be fantastically tough to actually change).

I like the cultural shift you’ve identified around the Zuckerberg/Eiseberg/Apatow axis of new male icons. And “funny men” makes for a nice territory with a lot of potential. I think you’ve hit on a cultural strategy that quite deep, but in some ways it leaves me wishing you had done even more with it.

You talk about creating a comic face to the brand and making fun of category conventions. And your manifesto is a good start. But you touch on stuff in your manifesto that I would have liked to see you explore further. Beyond just sponsoring a comedy festival and sending people funny video clips… what would it really mean to be a brand that takes the piss out of the expectations of being a guy today, and uses humour to stand up for guys to authentically be who they want to be?  The realm of male identity today is hugely ripe for some witty deconstruction. How could we really interject that perspective into culture and create debate and conversation around what it means to be a guy? And how could we use that to the brand’s advantage?

 

Geert Jan

This was the submission that I felt most polarized about. There is a lot of good stuff in here, smart and very thorough, and I like that you clearly stuck to answering the brief as a structure. But at times it was over-written and over-thought and over-packaged, and I found myself having to struggle through parts of it (45 pages!). I felt you were sometimes trying to prove how clever you were, and that is never a good thing for the audience to start thinking.

The analysis of the current orthodoxy was good, the changing gender roles are clearly a huge cultural shift. Identifying the trend of “slacking off” as “male R&R” after generations of dominance is really interesting and has a lot of potential. The two stereotypes of metrosexual and slacker, and the fact that they are at once common and unaspirational is also an interesting tension. There’s a gold mine of cultural relevance in there and you went back to it effectively in your tactics as material to culturally comment on.

But then we get to the Ivy League man. I was left wondering about what you meant by that. At first you seemed to be talking about it as a new preppiness. That confused me a bit because it wasn’t entirely connected with the cultural shifts you identified, and you could argue that preppiness actually is just a re-packaging of the same shaving category orthodoxies of successful, clean shaven men. But then where you actually went with it – into the James Francos of the world – was more about a new type of thoughtful, curious, individual, T-shaped male icon. But I wouldn’t call that Ivy League, it feels like the wrong label for the person you’ve identified. Ivy League brings to mind cultural elites, jackets with crests, and the rowing team, rather than individualism and pursuing your passions, and it kept throwing me off.

But, within all that, you’ve also made some great observations. I like the idea that the future is something to be actively created. I think James Franco (and others you mention like Justin Timberlake) is a brilliant cultural icon and the ideology around having a personal sense of style is really nice.  Being a curator of culture and timeless style is a good way to articulate the role of the brand. And standing up for purposeful, thoughtful men in an age of slackers and care-free guys is a really lovely position to take. I also like that you thought about how to use Will King – always a good idea to think about the founder and the role he plays in the brand mythology.

But some of the tactics felt like they could be patronizing to the target – things like a summer school in being a renaissance man, training them in sophistication. If they identify as this target they probably already think of themselves that way. And being a curator is a better place than a teacher. Then, after all the richness of the thinking, your manifesto felt like a bit of a let down. I missed the thoughtfulness and purposeful earlier descriptions, and reading some of it – “survival of the fittest”, “take charge of your destiny” – sounded like it could be a Gillette ad.

Thomas

Your submission felt understated and simple, which I liked. But probably too understated: I think you could have done a better job really calling out the key ideas to help the audience along, and having a stronger point of view. Sometimes you presented a lot of information and I wasn’t sure what the key take away was supposed to be. And sometimes there were really brilliant thoughts buried in the middle of a paragraph.

You did a really good, thorough job with the category myths and orthodoxy. Nice use of various sources, quotes, pictures and videos to make it really multi-dimensional.  And some great insights – like when the Gillette guys gets interesting and deviates from ‘perfect,’ he gets axed; or the link between category norms and male submission. But again these were a bit buried – could have called them out and explored them a bit more.

The cultural shift you identify around gender equality and how men are reacting is good. The ideology and source material was OK but felt a bit superficial – ‘the good things men did in the past are still valid’ is true but you could go deeper.  You have some really meaty stuff buried in there which would have been great to explore more, like Susan Faludi’s point about masculinity being derived from utility in society, and not being something ornamental to display. And Tom Ford talking about contributing to the world. You could do a lot with that. What position could the brand take around that thought? A brand standing for guys who contribute to society, or who get their hands dirty, would be an interesting cultural strategy.

Similarly, the idea of “just enough is more” is a really interesting thought, would have liked to hear a bit more about where that could go.

I think you had some OK ideas for tactics. Celebrating “interesting” men is a good starting point, but a bit obvious and I think you could have gone further with it. I like the idea of a shaving brand celebrating guys with facial hair overtly, that would definitely be a departure for the category.

Calling out the industry for over-doing the technology has a lot of cultural potential, stuff like “there is no good reason for Gillette Fusion” and getting dermatologists questioning the utility of 5 blades would be great. I wasn’t sure if these were just observations though, or something you were actually suggesting – but I think it would be a great tactic to go out and pick that fight.

Overall some really good stuff, but I think you needed a bit more clarity on your thoughts, and the courage of your convictions to really take a stand and have a cultural point of view that would create impact.

 

“Theestrategy” blog entry:
Not really sure what to say. This was a difficult one to read – to be honest at times I wasn’t sure what you were getting at. And using various ads or other source material to demonstrate your point is one thing, but this relied almost entirely on video clips and didn’t make clear your observations or conclusions about it. You left us to connect the dots too much. It’s too bad because there were a few potentially good nuggets of thought in there. Targeting younger guys at their early shaving moments is an interesting strategy, and I think an untapped moment in the category. The “boys will be boys but they need to become men” tension has some potential. But the whole thing kind of fizzled out and didn’t go anywhere.

 

John protests that he isn't a planner, which is one of the reasons I asked him to a judge, the people you have to persuade with your thinking are not planners either, they're marketeers like John ( marketing consultant if you didn't know).

The other reason I asked him is that he's a pedant and loves picking people up on inconsistencies and lapses of logic. That's important because you have to be inspiring of course, but the bedrock of any strategy and the way you deliver it is watertight thinking.

I'll quickly chip in with one observation of my own. A couple of judges have pointed out that championing beards ergo shaving less needs more stout defence as it logical result is reducing sales. I think that's a fair point but will be picked up for further debate, basically around how much any strategy..and 'the cultural approach in particular'…. results is behavioural change v reinforcing/switching brand preference.

Anyway, here it is:

General observations.

 

A difficult task but I was surprised that not everyone explicitly covered the six points consecutively. It seems to me that was a helpful guide designed to hone your thinking and make it easier for others to understand. Maybe this is why I thought the entries were better on analysis than deductions, specifically in terms of the cultural disruption and tactics sections.

 

It may be harsh but I felt the analysis of the status quo became a substitute for the cultural element of the assignment in many cases, Yes, for both genders, the current marketing emphasis is a combination of smooth beauty and the  technical innovation that facilitates this, but you also need to consider what shaving represents as a behaviour and what it signifies.

 

In similar vein, when it came to tactics, there were good ideas, but I thought the King image was jumped on too easily. It can provide good solutions but only if the cultural disruption points to it – don't shoehorn it into your analysis.

 

The key is that people who identify with the cultural disruption will identify with KOS. Don't tell them who they are, tell them how they feel.

 

That said, I'm not a planner so maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick.

 

 

The strategy.wordpress.com

 

 

You go through the process ok, but where's the original cultural disruption? An assessment of status quo is fine, but you don't go far enough away from it. What is shaving – culturally speaking? I'd like to see much more on the reasoning behind your proposed social disruption – this is the key argument and doesn't belong in an appendix. You also need more than one conference as source of your evidence and the manifesto is too brief,

 

You conclude that becoming a man is the fulcrum of your strategy but I'm not sure how that's cultural disruption and , in any case,, you don't define what masculinity is. You also don't say how KOS uniquely provides that or what the benefits of becoming a man are.  (I'd also dispute whether shaving can ever be an amazing experience).

 

The strength of an insight lies in relating the culture to shaving – you don't do that, You and others just talk about the nebulous idea of men, I'm also concerned that you are isolating a small segment of the market without enthusing them or, more importantly, allowing spillover into other groups osmotically. If the message appeals to the the young, it also helps if it can appeal to not so young – even if that's self-delusion – being a man is something that has already happened to them (arguably) and so there's no appeal to them in your approach.

 

 

As for your tactics – I don't think you specify any other than rebellion. Disruption doesn't have to be rebellion but you need to tell me what the tactics are and not just the philosophy behind them.

 

 

 

 

Zeljko

 

 

No focus on what shaving is. Why is well-groomed, clean-shaving a good thing and a cultural norm?

 

Creativity is not a new thing so I don't see it as a disruption – it's just an amorphous market segment. I'm not sure why you've chosen them – why does this apply to shaving specifically?

 

How would that reflect uniquely on KOS? Beck's and others use art/creativity but the best executions facilitate something unique to their users – sponsorship which is effectively what you're suggesting has to have the product at the heart of the infrastructure and ecosystem of the target audience. What does shaving have to do with creativity?

 

In tactical terms, the indie movie idea fits with your thinking but I'm concerned that it would be very costly and involve a long time lag from inception to reality.

 

Moreover, focusing on people who sometimes don't shave is an odd approach commercially – this is a company that lost 2million last year, and we want to encourage people to shave more not less.

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Nixon

 

The true challenger brand is an idea I like – more companies should do it. But that's not a cultural insight and it is that which is the key to this assignment.

 

I'd also question whether leader brands really are happy with weak or moderate performance, It sounds like a complacent assumption – that they'll just let you walk in and steal their share. They won't, they'll react and that's why you have to connect strongly with your potential users.

 

You mention functionality as a secondary message – why secondary? It's why KOS started in the first place – the search for a better shave (via shaving oil as it happens) without the nonsense of Gillette and their 7 innovations. I'm biased but I think this needs more consideration as can be the patentable source of true competitive advantage.

 

Instead you opt for mischief, Doesn't everyone do mischief these days? On the one hand that may be a good thing in that people clearly identify with it, but how will you stop being me-too in your marketing especially when you explicitly state you're aiming for the middle ground of mischief?

 

That said, I think your manifesto is strong and pithy -though as with most of the entries it makes no mention of women.

 

There's also some good ideas in the creative expression section, but for me the big one is the retail idea.. Real marketing isn't just promotion – distribution is crucial – associative piggy-backing can make KOS stand out in a way it won't do on the supermarket shelf and will be presenting itself to users in a KOS state of mind. That's real differentiation.

 

 

Justin Thor Heyer

 

The chore  and compulsion of shaving is where my thinking went immediately when presented with the assignment.  It never seems to be discussed in the marketing – the focus is on the positive but surely there's greater power in making a negative a positive? I would have liked you to pursue this further.

 

No surprise then that I like the idea of online fora,  get people talking about the subject and identifying it with KOS and you build a constituency. Smart, cheap tactic and a good way to get KOS to head of search engine results. What about a shaving app? That would be cheap and useful – true branded utility.

 

 

Not sure I'd phrase it as the art of shaving and I think your process break-down makes it sound a bit mechanistic and, dare I say, a chore, It's a coincidence that you're Australian but I'd already mentioned the slip, slop slap campaign as a creative route when discussing it with the other judges. I like the idea of focusing on the results that accrue from shaving but also make it clear that it's a good – trade-off in real life as well as in theory.

 

I like your breakdown of users and especially that you don't forget women  but in terms of the assignment, I'm not sure that you've made the cultural disruption clear to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caroline Dahlman.

 

Targeting those who aren't targeted is very smart thinking and the Man that Gillette forgot is a great line – but what's the cultural distinction/disruption?

 

It seems to me that you're focused on body hair or did I get that wrong?  I would like more on women's attitudes to hairy men – does shaving have to be non-facial – that's the majority activity surely?

 

It seems to me there is some tension between grooming and narcissism – manliness and nurturing. The Man that Gillette forgot isn't the one obsessed with body shaving is he – frankly that seems to be more in tune with what Gillette already do

 

Removing hairs as a barrier is an intriguing rallying cry but it has to be believable premise and I need to know why it is unique to KOS

 

(Also – if he already has a woman – does she not like him already regardless of his body hair – is that a logical flaw/)

 

That said, there's a lot of interesting executions in your list, though I'd suggest that most

men don't read female bloggers – info needs to be on "men's" media

 

 

PS I hate the last page – it's a valid statement but don't apologies, you undermine yourself  and your thinking. It would have been better to say in the midst of your text that you would need more research to confirm your hypothesis.

 

 

SC

 

Good on Gillette. Good on tension, But who are these unsmooth guys and why are they unsmooth? Do they think they cant compete or do they simply not aspire to Gillette ideal? That seems important to understand.

 

Not sure why you suddenly leap to identifying a demographic -  are these behaviours and concerns really limited to those with a university education or indeed of a certain age? This and the Anxious Achievers moniker all seem a bit too "advertising industry" for me. Stick with the tension and see what behaviours it leads to – they will inform your tactics in a better way than overlaying socio-economic guides

 

 

 

 

Kudos for being the first person to mention dry shavers – small segment but might be worth contemplating. Useless in my experience and therefore a ripe target market. Why don't they wet shave and what can KOS do for them?

 

On the tactical front, I think packaging is a good route to pursue albeit not cheap,

 

But your stand-up idea I frankly don't get. I'm not sure you've shown me how it connects to your idea and to KOS.  My reaction to nice comedy is that while it may be unthreatening it also isn't very funny and  that comedy these days is mainstream and the safe ones like McIntyre and Kay appeal to sheep. You need to justify this better for my liking but if you can find the right comedian it might work.

 

 

Geert-Jan Baltus

 

I know planners drone on, but that's no reason to copy Rob Campbell. It was a chore to read this much. You've shown all your work. Distil it down and keep me interested. Focus my attention on your key points – they're in there

 

I shall now contradict myself by saying that the analysis of lost men was terrific and I think I want more on that and less of other the stuff. Need to know more about them, so  that the subsequent leap to the Ivy League man is not as baffling as it was. Where did he come from?

 

It struck me as a construct imposed into your narrative rather than an evolution. Moreover they're the epitome of privilege and the source of the whole preppy ideal which I think you're arguing against. Roger Federer looks very Ivy League as did John Kennedy junior. For me, your description is a caricature and too prescriptive – better to talk in terms of attitude than dress code. Thinking about why they wear what they wear is more important than what they wear

 

James Franco is not a good choice – he has a beard! Indeed  too many of your images have beards – KOS isn't in the beard business though it would be interesting to know why beardies don't shave and if there's an angle there to exploit.

 

Finally – Chapter 4.? My Ivy League education was insufficient to allow me to understand this – seriously.

 

That said, I do think you make a very good point about products that talk about themselves being boring. I'd go further and consider talking not about the user but about those with whom they interact – I had an idea about KOS reducing stubble burn that would be very distinctive and reflect a definite cultural change but I'll keep that to myself.

 

As for your tactics, they strike me as expensive and multi-directional. You talk about young feckless men, then focusing on the older and very driven  Will King, and finally introduce curators who are too old to appeal to the 17-25 year olds in my opinion. You're too wide ranging – and you're throwing everything in – including Groupon, It's good that you've though about all the possibilities but the key then is to be selective in pursuit of affordability and effectiveness.

 

You end with a very well written manifesto but I just wish it had more specificity – a clearer cultural disruption would have helped you there.

 

Thomas Wagner

 

Good analysis of the status quo and a history of Gillette's advertising and "is this really the best a man can get?" is a very good question to ask.  But I think you need more proof of your subsequent assertions about submission and insecurity and how that relates to shaving.

 

What is the cultural disruption you're highlighting? It seems to be a redefinition of nebulous things like manliness and masculinity combined with a rejection of the technological claims. I may be wrong but you've not made it clear enough for me. Why do men want to be good men ? Why do they want a new definition and what makes KOS the smart choice for them?

 

For me, you've created an alluring alternative but not explained why it's alluring and to whom?

 

The tactics that follow are  generally consistent though I wonder if the idea of a modern "gentleman" and barber shops suggest higher costs in contradiction with  your complaints about Gilltete's prices? And I still don't get why so many of the entries featured beards – surely  the anti-christ of shaving?

 

Finally, the  manifesto lays out the position well – I just need you to anchor it explicitly to a cultural disruption 

 

OK, you'll notice this a bit different to Andrea, both in what she was looking for and what she thought was good and what needed work. Don't let it confuse you. Ask 7 planners a questions and you'll get 10 anwers (if you get that far, some will tell you you're asking the wrong thing). You'll develop a planning style as you go along, but you'll find you'll also have to adapt that to the different expectations and styles of various senior planners and planning directors.

That style is as much about how you present your thinking as it is about the thinking itself. 

So use the variety of feedback as maximum input, personally I love it when someone tells me I'm wrong, it forces me to think really hard abot why I think I'm right, or gives fodder for getting a lot better. So take all the feedback and feel free to challenge it, or use to hone your thinking and approach.

Here it is:

So starting with a general  point:

 

Three submissions relied entirely on other people’s ads as ‘source’ material.  Ads are not exactly a full and frank representation of culture or society and you shouldn’t really rely on them as such.  I do appreciate that there wasn’t the time or budget to do primary research but I’d have liked to see other sources of desk research used (other submissions had dug up free online academic research, interviewed friends or found relevant news stories).  Yes, yes, I know Andrew uses a lot of TV ads in his posts, but he mainly uses them to illustrate points he’s already made and supported.

 

 

My comments:

 

The Strategy (blog post by unknown)

 

I think the author was trying to suggest a WKD style ‘aligned with young lads behaving slightly badly’ positioning which is interesting as I don’t believe that any skincare brand has tried that before.

 

But this entry seemed to miss off stage six in the brief entirely (“Write a manifesto … something anyone involved can read, so they can get excited about what you're setting out to do”), so it didn’t really deliver the inspiration that a great strategy needs.

 

 

Matt Nixon (APSOTW-2 ppt)

 

Matt has obviously given a lot of thought to what he wants the reader to take away with them.  Quotes, illustrative imagery, a user friendly layout and a Big Idea (grown up Mischief) make it a memorable, sell-able piece of work.  I know it’s a cliché, but you really could sell a client this strategy in the time you had stood in the lift with them. 

 

As a manifesto, (Grown Up) Mischief is relevant, distinctive, a good brand fit and ownable within the category.  To be honest, I think this thinking is better than the ‘Creative expressions’ that followed it, but overall – very nice work.

 

 

Zelijko (APSOTW_Zelijko_2)

 

There’s a clear and distinctive (if a bit brief at two pages long) idea here – celebrating the ‘occasional shave’ as a form of creative freedom.

 

But I think you might struggle to convince King of Shaves that appealing to people who shave less frequently (and indeed suggesting that it is desirable to shave less frequently) is a sure fire way to build market share…

 

 

Justin Thor Hoyer (King of Shaves)

 

A nice idea to get men to ‘appreciate and love the art of shaving’ and introduce a routine for a ‘King Shave’.  Great from a commercial perspective and also true to where the KoS brand has come from.

 

It was well researched – although following the many links to outside information revealed that some of the snappy wordplay I’d been appreciating (e.g. most men have a hate/hate/hate relationship with shaving) had actually been lifted from source material.  *Don’t do this* – either be very upfront and quote the article directly or find your own voice.

 

 

Carolin Dahlman (King of Shaves Carolin Dahlman ppt)

 

Carolin wants KoS to go after The Good Guy – the man Gillette forgot.  She’d position facial hair as a barrier to Finding Love.  I suppose it’s the equal opportunities version of a 1950’s housewife ad.

 

The presentation flowed well and came to a clear and concise conclusion, even if I’d have like to see the manifesto itself flagged up a little more clearly.  However MAJOR bonus points to Carolin for a link at the end to a three minute youtube video of her pitching the strategy where she was enthused, told a story and sold it well.

 

 

 

SC (King of Shaves SC)

 

Sonia writes well, giving her document a clear beginning, middle and end and a manifesto for the brand to march behind.  I particularly loved the last line: Because there’s more to life than caressing your face in the mirror after shaving with a razor that could have been nicked off the set of Minority Report.

 

But I didn’t find anything that summed her manifesto up in a single sentence, which is a real shame as she’s obviously very capable of doing so.  Perhaps it was something along the lines of ‘There’s more ways than one to be a Man’? 

 

 

Geert-Jan Baltus (KINGODSHAVES_GJBALTUS)

 

The work is all beautifully presented with good supporting imagery, but there’s just too much of it.  If it takes 45 slides to get to a manifesto, either your thinking or your working is too complex.  It’s very important to go through the thinking process – but you only want to actually share the important leads-us-on-to-the-next-point stuff. 

 

There’s a lot of excellent work here identifying the Ivy League Man, but I’m not sure that the manifesto necessarily fully reflects him, there’s a little bit of a disconnect.

 

 

Thomas Wagner (KOS Thomas Wagner)

 

There are some nice observations about Modern Man and Modern Masculinity here and a nicely linked solution celebrating the modern gentleman (with part of being a gentleman linked to having a decent shave).

 

There are gems too in the manifesto, but they’re buried a bit.  Perhaps a shorter, punchier manifesto might have got the point across more effectively?

Okay. As mentioned, we're running  a little late with this.

You can read 7 of the entries here on my Scribd

And there's one more here

 

Below is the the first part of the feedback. Please feel free to add your own comments. Open source etc.

APSotW Feedback from Andreea.

For me the winner would be Thomas Wagner, Geert in second place and SC on 3^rd.

• Thomas and Geert had similar ideas, except Geert went into a bit too much idealistic detail. The Ivy Man is an ideal. The two countries where Ivy has the strongest following are England and Japan. In Japan, Ivy style is revered with a kind of polite affection coupled with tremendous respect for its original source: college campuses. In the UK, Ivy was always a kind of secret society for the sussed few, not something for the mass readership of men’s fashion magazines (the publication of “The Ivy Look” is disingenuous: you can’t be both elite and mass-market). It’s also about a love/hate relationship with the US. The idea of a man being more than an empty shell was good, but the Ivy revival feels like the manifestation of a collective daydream.
• Because it was meant to be an international campaign, I felt the idea of the KoS comedy club would be complicated to implement and adapt on a local level – every country has a different culture, therefore a different type of humour. In my mind, the role of humour is not to make other people laugh as much as it is to make others know who is in charge. This could be a good thing for men, but at the end of the day we’re talking about selling razors.  To me, the only reason men groom is for the opposite sex (history & every man I asked said that unless prompted, he wouldn’t bother with shaving, if left to his own devices). 

 

1. 1.       Matt Nixon’s entry (APSOTW-2[1])

• I had to go back to the last slide to find the name – I’d say with stuff like this, don’t be afraid of putting your name first thinking you’re being presumptuous. You’re not. When presenting to strangers you introduce yourself first, right?
• Good intro in terms of other consumer brands that are doing well (e.g. Bic limited by the simplicity of its product) and what’s working for them, although a bit superficial in terms of analysis.
• Nice touch with putting in quotes from colleagues; shows some effort to go out in the world and talk about it, even if it’s just people nearby. All men have to shave.
• Shaving as mischief; mischief as removing signs of growing up – good to isolate the cultural strategy down to one word;
• It feels like there isn’t much thought about men vs. women in today’s world. Women already see men as immature when it comes to a lot of things, so saying that shaving is going to make them preserve this modern immaturity is counter-productive to me. The idea needs more work to be turned on its head though with a bit more thinking.

1. 2.       Zeljko

• King of Shaves celebrates the occasional shave as one more form of fuelling the creative freedom
• Very succinct presentation – stems from the fact that if women can do what they want with their hair, then so should men. To me that sounds like something out of wishful thinking, rather than something men need (more narrow and focused in terms of their identity in relationship to the world).
• You’d always struggle to balance expressing this ‘creative freedom’ with selling more products and short-term marketing objectives that arise (e.g. the classic shampoo problem and making people wash more often so you sell more product).
• The reason why most men don’t shave is because it’s comfortable not to (as observed). However, wallowing in this comfort does not a man make. Men derive more pleasure from the fruits of their labour than women – perhaps there’s a way to do that to shaving and the ritual of shaving in the morning?

1. 3.       Justin Thor Hoyer

• Australian only presentation?
• Good observation about how shaving itself isn’t discussed much – but just the end result, be it good or bad.
• Good idea about focusing on scrubs and moisturisers which protect sensitive skin – would need to focus on how to address the problem of men with irritable skin much in the way condoms have addressed size. There are no “small” condoms – they start with “medium”, “large” and “extra-large”.
• The presentation, however, does not focus on the cultural strategy side of things. It can’t be judged as such.

1. 4.       Carolin Dahlman

• At first I wasn’t certain about all the buzzwords and the 4 categories of men but it made sense when it became obvious that shaving brands usually target 2 archetypes.
• A nice look into a modern man’s worries – something not many have done;
• Hair is a barrier between a good guy and his dream – also something I find culturally relevant. His dream isn’t to be a sports star like the “Gillette” man
• A nice little nugget – that “the queen usually makes the king”. However, getting women to talk about how hairy and disgusting men with hair are feels like ridicule and is in stark contrast with the “men just want someone nice to spend their lives with” idea! This could be a part of the campaign, but I’m not sure it would work as the campaign itself.

1. 5.       SC

• Starts off really, really well and is probably the first one to follow the signposts in the briefing.
• Gives a good cultural context – that nowadays some of the so-called “nerds” are turning into success stories. That and the fact that men have about as many products as women, yet no signposts on how to use them, where, when, how often etc.
• “Anxious Achievers” – perhaps it might be an exaggeration to say that they are probably university educated. Likely to be, but considering an international audience and different university fees, this is less likely to hold true.
• Good observation about the ritual of shaving forcing them to look into the mirror and accepting their skin condition for what it is;
• I like the idea of the comedy club – men judged by other men alone, and not by women. Gives them something of their own, without feeling like they are worthless. Something to win (within reach) and something they can be good at. Something every man could try, whether he’s a suit, cook or works in the local chippy.
• “Shaving kings make their mates laugh, not jealous” – what a good observation; like in sports, good players make the entire team look good, not just themselves.
• It feels a bit unfinished but then a lot of the brand’s voice will stem from creative work and execution.

1. 6.       Geert Jan Baltus

• Like the observation about traditional shaving brands as showing man’s domination over nature – a very American ideology (imperialistic almost, the civilised vs. the savage)
• The new type of man knows he can make it, he just has to work harder – good, it says that King of Shaves needs to appeal to that ideology
• The Ivy man reeks of idealistic/romanticised view of what it used to represent but it makes the point that a respectable man is an educated man, rather than an athlete with primary instincts.
• Needs more focus on what the idea really is: “intrinsic motivation to make something of his life”
• I think this world of the “Monocle man” is actually closer to how King of Shaves sees itself now (participating in the National Grooming Awards, showcasing in stylist magazines, championing traditional barber shop shaves)
• Interesting idea to put men of different ages who don’t know each other together; it would  be a way of revisiting male camaraderie. The summer school is also interesting, but feels a bit too niche for the average guy.
• The ideology feels right – attack the “empty shells” of Gillette/Wilkinsons advertising
• “Find common ground and apply old rules to new times” – good
• A big caveat is that you have to find a way of avoiding the “young fogey” look that a lot of people are against;
• It feels very cosmopolitan and idealistic but stripped down it could be very relevant to a younger, growing audience.

1. 7.       Thomas Wagner

• It feels on the same line as the previous one but more stripped down. There’s not as much detail but the writing is good and gets to the point quickly.
• I think this is my overall favourite
• "good things men did in the past are still valid and relevant today and will be tomorrow” – good
• “just enough is more” – good
• “there are no shortcuts to being a good man” –good
• Letting men have a beard – embrace the culture because it’ll have to go at some point;