The gap between invention and true innovation.
This is basically a theme pulled from one part of one discussion, but I thought it was telling and interesting enough to stand on its own. One of my favorite quotes (paraphrased a bit as I tried to keep up with the rapid fire discussion) from the session on ‘What’s Next’ was from Ayesha Khanna:
She was talking broadly about the R&D culture in the U.S., and how it is very good at coming up with amazing things in research labs and getting patents filed. But how many of those patents and inventions see the light of day is a very different story. Her point was that while other countries may be lagging behind on paper when it comes to # of patents, they’re (quickly) getting better at getting stuff made and out into the world, where it can either be deemed useful or a flop by the masses.

Got me thinking that agencies have a very similar problem— plenty of really interesting ideas (inventions) exist within all of our walls- on concept boards, as rough sketches on napkins or tear sheets, or just in random conversations between smart minds who work in the same building. Yet more often than not those ideas go nowhere, either because a client wasn’t ready for it, it wasn’t sold in right, it simply wasn’t feasible, not the right time, etc etc. Places like Made By Many, BBH’s new venture Black Sheep Fund, and others are countering this and focusing on getting stuff made and out into the world, but by and large agencies haven’t broken out of the invention vs innovation trap. The more we can get stuff out of our dark labs and into the world where it can either fly or die a quick death, the better off we’ll be.

Speaking of which- for planners, how may we best balance rigor with speed to innovate?
This is something I’ve been thinking about a lot recently and the conference was yet another reminder. In nearly every job description for planners you will see (or that you may be writing now), “planning rigor” in some form is almost always mentioned. Not that it should be surprising- applying strategic rigor, examining ideas and territories from every angle, is critical in getting to the best work. But the term and associated ‘process’ can tend to feel somewhat academic to me. How much rigor is too much, and is there a point when it gets in the way of true innovation? I guess what I’m asking is— despite best intentions, do we run the risk of sometimes getting in our own way? I don’t really have an answer to this, but feels like an interesting area as we all try to evolve planning broadly, and specifically within our own agencies. Making stuff, not just thinking, has been a popular rally cry for a bit now in planner echo chambers, but are getting there fast enough?

We’ve only scratched the surface on the impact gaming is having on culture.
Aaron Dignan of Undercurrent gave one of my favorite talks of the day, an adaptation of sorts of his new book Game Frame. He provided some lessons about how game mechanics can fundamentally change not just our approach to our work, but the workplace itself. And importantly he brought up some powerful points about how incorporating game mechanics doesn’t mean just adding points and badges to everything you do. But rather thinking about the underlying behavioral motivations and how those can translate into gaming experiences in the business world (read: “gamification” ain’t your answer). Bottom line, it’s about to get so much more interesting and exciting. After watching Aaron speak, am definitely putting his book at the top of the reading list. Some of his lessons for what can be turned into a game (again paraphrased, hope I’m doing it justice):
Most startups didn’t spend much time talking about marketing and/or advertising (at the conference, or in general, it seems).
AirBnB. Kickstarter. Thrillist. Justin Gignac and his NYC Garbage project (as awesome as it sounds). The most inspiring people of the day didn’t really mention advertising, marketing, agencies, or the like. Nor did they seem to agonize about it much in the early phases of their respective ventures. They had an idea (ideas that do, as Gareth puts it), along with a million reasons why it could probably fail, but they just went ahead and did it. No overthinking, no grand ‘social engagement experiential explosion contact mapping plan’ that promised this thing would be the next Twitter, they just put their heads down and did it. They tried some stuff, it failed, and they went back and tried other stuff until something worked. It’s a mentality we talk a lot about around agencies, but one that isn’t quite yet in practice more often than not. Ed Cotton probably captured what all of this means best in his PSFK recap on how the makers are now the heroes, and if agencies hope to draw in the best people, perhaps we need to start infusing the values and ideals of the startups that inspire us all.

Somewhat of a side note- nobody really talked about Facebook.
Perhaps surprisingly, perhaps not. But I found it interesting- and honestly somewhat refreshing- that facebook occupied very little of the overall discussion and speaker sessions. This isn’t some rant against FB, I’m a fan, I’m on it far too much, yada yada. And besides, the value (or lack) of it for both personal social connections and potential for brands has been talked about ad nauseum. Maybe it’s because so many of those in attendance feel similarly, and spend so much time discussing it at their respective places of business, that it felt like this wasn’t the place to talk even more about it. Or perhaps it means facebook is fully getting to the place Clay Shirky has written about: “communications tools don’t become socially interesting until they become technologically boring”. Despite the constant changes and updates from Zuck and co, maybe it has actually just started to become part of the fabric, an assumed part of the world that doesn’t need to be discussed in tech innovation circles. So what did I miss? I’m sure there’s plenty.
I’ve realized that aside from a steady stream of hashtagged tweets (or perhaps because of that), I’m not too good at taking actual notes during conferences. Look forward to hearing others thoughts in the coming days. In the meantime, big thanks to Piers Fawkes and the rest of the PSFK crew, and all the fantastic speakers who were good enough to share their time, energy, and perspectives with the rest of us.

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

What a planner’s path was, circa 10 - 15 years ago.
(A completely arbitrary timeframe, and there are a lot of assumptions here, so call me on it as you see fit). Seems like planners then had few chances to connect with or collaborate with other planners beyond the 4 walls of the agency within they worked at that given time. Young planners were rarely exposed to the broader planning world, maybe once a year at the 4A’s conference, but other than that, it seems pretty limited. There was little chance to share thinking or ideas that extended beyond current client work with a broader peer group, unless you were a heavy hitter at director level or above. And I have to imagine that made most initial career moves pretty incremental, since only a small group knew how you thought or what you might have to offer.

Planner’s career paths today, and their reach beyond agency walls.
What’s amazing to me about planning today is the fact that ‘work’ isn’t always confined to the walls of your agency. Obviously, there are a few key people (and they are not the only ones) I’ve worked with to whom I credit basically all of my career growth, and without them I would be nowhere. But I’m also aware of the fact that part of my journey so far has been made possible because of some connections I’ve made and the relationships I’ve fostered among people I’ve never worked with. I’ve been able to connect with some smart people who, in a similar situation 15 years ago, I may have only heard of in name, but never gotten the chance to know or collaborate with. And it’s added another layer of richness to the job.

It’s also lead to a more accessible form of career networking.
I’ll admit, I’m not the strongest face-to-face networker in the world. Walking up to random people at conferences and striking up conversations has always been weird and uncomfortable for me, and I’ve always been envious of those who seem to have no problems with it. But today, it seems like the need to be at things like the 4A’s “festival” in order to make those same connections is less necessary (not that it doesn’t have it’s role, personally don’t see it as an either/or). Being able to make a series of digital introductions has helped me make connections I may have never otherwise had (in fact many strong professional connections for me are people I’ve only met a couple times or never at all, as I’ve written about before). Think this is a major shift, because it’s allowed people like me who may be a bit more introverted and less comfortable with big networking events to still seek out connections on a more one-to-one basis. And some of those connections have lead me to amazing opportunities (like, for example, the chance to speak at Planning-ness this year). I’m not quite sure what I would’ve done without this. In fact, I’m not sure how I would’ve grown as a planner without some of the tech we take for granted to connect me with such an incredibly diverse and talented pool of people.

From personal to collective- the effect on planning itself.
Beyond just changing the career path, feels like something else happened. I clearly remember times a few years ago when I was given the figurative pat on the head and a knowing smirk by agency/client folks alike for suggesting such ludicrous things as a company having a blog or, god forbid, tweeting about stuff. I’m sure many of you have experienced the same, and it goes without saying it’s not a great feeling. My point in mentioning that is I really believe planners have kept each moving forward, helped keep each other motivated in the face of adversity, and we’ve kept each other progressive in part by our constant connection to one another. I imagine most of our departments are quite small, and we’re all so busy, but the outlet we have to the larger planner crowd I think keeps many of us going (I know it’s a huge part of my day, and how I decompress amidst the madness) and serves as a key source of inspiration. Not to mention that we now have access to a free gold mine of insights and information, from incredibly smart people all around the world.

And beyond planning, it feels like a big benefit to agencies.
All of this makes it clear to me that planners can help drive a more collaborative spirit through our respective agencies given our own benefit from working together. For all the talk of openness and collaboration, I think it’s safe to say many of us likely still work in places that see other agencies as “enemies” and which shy away from sharing intel openly and freely. While obviously we don’t advocate handing over every company secret, what we can help drive through is a more open dialogue in the agency world, and push our peers to let go of the mindset that collaboration with ‘competitors’ is not OK. And in fact, it can lead to some of the best partnerships you’ve never thought of. We’re already starting to see it come to life (at Boulder Digital Works, for example) and I’m sure we could use more of it.

So what does it all mean?
Until last night, I wasn’t quite sure where I was going with this, if it’s even all that interesting, or how to end this little ramble. But a great post by Thas around what our generation’s story is or will be (similar to how generations in this business before had things like Art + Copy), got me thinking how we progress through our careers today can ultimately lead us to and help shape that next story. It’s almost better that we don’t know exactly what it is, and it’s an opportunity to figure it out together, along with everyone else out there. A more collaborative career path, enabled by technology. More than ever, we can (and we are) helping each other chart the course for the future. And maybe what’s most exciting to me is that it’s not just happening within the walls of only one agency, but across our broader community. We all have a role to play (if you want one). I’m not the first one to say this is an exciting time to be in this business, and I’m sure I won’t be the last.

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »

Last week, I finally got around to backing Bud Caddell’s excellent idea for a new book, The Bucket Brigade. Seems like everyone has weighed in at some point or another with their thoughts on why they are backing it and why the idea makes all the sense in the world, so I won’t spend time repeating what others far smarter than I have said in far smarter ways.

But what I did want to take the time and mention is why I decided to up my pledge from sponsor to editorial board level. I think Tim said it best in his recent post, the reason this project seems to have sparked so much interest is that it is tapping into our collective desire to do something, rather than just talk about it. And let’s face it, there’s always a reason to put off doing something like this. Too busy with our day jobs, not enough time in the day, not sure where to get started, and on and on. There will always be one. But thanks to Bud, the chance to get together with a bunch of insanely brilliant people and really do something interesting in the world is a reality, not just a theory. And I for one am incredibly excited at the possibilities.

Congrats to Bud on all of the support he’s received, and thanks to everyone who has also decided to get involved. Can’t wait to see and be a part of what happens. And if you haven’t joined the crew yet, you’ve still got a few days left to become a backer.

Posted via email from avin narasimhan | Comment »