Lean Planning: Eric Ries’ ‘Lean Startup’ methodology can enhance creative Planning & Strategy

Lean Planning: Eric Ries’ ‘Lean Startup’ methodology can enhance creative Planning & Strategy

‘Lean Planning’

In the spirit of Lean Planning this essay will be short, sharp and efficient; written to employ the principles it seeks to convey.  Hopefully the self-referential, allegorical approach that it embodies will exemplify the axioms it aims to communicate, and not be perceived by its audience or ‘sample’ group as rudeness.  This essay in itself represents a ‘Minimum Viable Strategy’, but more on that later.

The concept put forward in this paper is for the future of planning, ‘Planning 3.0’, or planning in 2020; if not these, then perhaps just a better way of developing strategy.

It is quite simple.  It is what we (by use of plural pronoun) call ‘Lean Planning’.

Lean Planning is the combination of two very basic ideas: ‘Accelerated Iteration’ and ‘Extreme Strategy’.  These concepts are unashamedly lifted and taken from the lean start-up movement.  A lot of the content discussed in this paper can be found in the growing amount of literature in the start-up field, and the author would strongly recommend the books mentioned in this essay; most of the Lean Planning method is a reapplication of the principles outlined in these books.  The original thinking for this composition comes in its link to the role of planning, and its fundamental place in our future.  No more, no less.

This essay will discuss the two basic concepts that comprise Lean Planning, and then summarise the collective benefits of the method when applied to the real world.  The benefits are huge for those that commit: happier clientry, better work, healthier profit & loss accounts and a more homogenous process, both internally and externally.

So let’s begin.

WHAT IS LEAN PLANNING?

Lean Planning is a style of planning that is grounded in agility, reactivity and constant communication.  It rejects the role of the Planner locked away for days on end. Instead preferring the planning function as a constantly moving, constantly innovating, always learning entity – using every tool at its disposal.

Lean Planning means changing one’s perception of imperfection.  It means identifying failure as a positive.  It means changing the way you think about the way you work.

It is comprised of two fundamental concepts: Accelerated Iteration and Extreme Strategy.  These two concepts are inextricably linked.  They cannot be executed without each other, and together will change the way your Planning department works.

ACCELERATED ITERATION

Accelerated iteration is an accelerated version of what Planning should do already: receive a brief, develop the strategy, present the strategy, iterate, finalise, and deploy. There are of course millions of differences to this process but when reduced down to a few stages this is it – or some adaptation of ‘it’.

So why does it often get so confused?  Why do we often waste so much time? If the process works, why do we find ourselves presenting work that has been a long time in development, but is still fundamentally wrong?

There are many answers to these questions beyond just ‘interrogating the brief’.

Yes we can list the problems; unhelpful client briefs, unfocused planning, low quality research, broad parameters, and incorrect objectives – the list is long.  But if one employs and puts into practice Accelerated Iteration then this can be solved, or at least minimised.  Accelerated Iteration is designed to cut down the amount of time wasted in developing strategy or work that isn’t wanted or has become unnecessary. Which pretty much covers all of the above.

It works like this.

In this fast paced, constantly changing world a clients’ problems change pretty quickly too.  This means that a brief no longer stays set in stone, and nor should it.   The best way to service our clients is not to lock them in to a brief that they can’t change, but help them be more fluid, realise their changing requirements and adapt as much as possible to their wants and needs.  Our job is to solve their problems, and if these change then so must the solutions.

There is no point in solving an out of date problem.

The concept is simple.   Accelerated iteration aims to get through the strategy cycle as quickly as possible.  Its purpose is to continuously feedback to the client with complete transparency. By doing this any possible problems are encountered quicker, and therefore can be with dealt sooner, prior to moving forward.  This means constantly communicating with clients, constantly receiving feedback, and constantly developing and iterating the strategy accordingly.

Here are the 6 key stages again:

  • Receive a brief
  • Develop the strategy
  • Present the strategy
  • Iterate
  • Finalise
  • Deploy

Now, if we were to identify the main problem areas where most strategic projects get stuck ‘on repeat’ it would most likely be the first four stages.  If you have a larger problem with deployment then this is probably a separate issue (we would argue).  For most planners stages one to four can be the most frustrating time in the process: constantly going back to the drawing board and either starting again, or heavily revising what seemed to be a perfectly fine approach is demoralising.  This iterative cycle is depicted in a more simplified form in Figure 1 below.

Fig. 1 The iterative cycle of strategic planning

The Loop

The Planning Feedback Loop

So what happens by moving through the iterative cycle quicker?

Quicker iterations, quicker learning, and quicker thinking.

By iterating faster the client brief is interrogated, first thoughts validated (or taken off the table without too much time or emotions being attached), and the problem undergoes continuous recognition and redefinition (as is the strategy).  By seeking to move through this loop at an accelerated pace without fear of how many times it takes, the client is always aware of what direction the planner is heading, what avenues they are exploring, and crucially what to expect from their agency next.

What does this mean?

The iterative strategic planning cycle becomes smoother.  The client always feels in the loop (and that they are not paying us to go off brief), and the Planner feels like their time isn’t being wasted; they have more regular check-ins with the client (or decision-maker) and know that they are heading in the right direction.

Accelerated Iteration also means greater agility and ability to react to change.  If the brief changes then it does not become the drama and ‘blame game’ that is often seen permeating the walls of the creative agency.  Rather, it is a short discussion that quickly turns to problem solution.   Accelerated Iteration understands that whilst interrogating the brief is a worthwhile activity (and a fundamental part of the strategic cycle), many problems arise once the brief is worked on, and it is getting to these problems that supplied the logical rationale for the concept.

By using the Accelerated Iteration technique we find the real problem sooner, we have the ability to flex, we keep the client happy, and minimal time is wasted.

For it to work however, one must embrace ‘Extreme Strategy’ and the ‘Minimum Viable Strategy’.

EXTREME STRATEGY

If Accelerated Iteration means continuously feeding back to (and receiving feedback from) the client, how is one to develop strategy?  Again this is more attitudinal than anything else, and again comes back to simplicity.

The problem with many strategists is their penchant for providing the answer.  It is an ego boost to work on a strategy and present it back to rapturous cries of ‘genius’ and ‘well done that planner’; but this mostly exists in our head.  The reality is that most of the time ideas become so convoluted in their inception and evolution that merit is not yielded to one person (except for awards when often too much is attributed to an individual or small number of contributors).  Nevertheless, once a strategy is presented feedback is always forth coming, clients aren’t known for saying nothing, and we should be suspicious when this situation occurs.

Extreme Strategy asks that we accept the ongoing nature of the strategic cycle.  It asks us to admit to ourselves that actually had we gone back to the client with the first strategic framework we had thought of, our journey to the ‘solution’ might have been quicker or easier.

Often our love for the perfect (and to be seen as perfect) blinds us to the benefits of failure.  Tim Harford writes quite beautifully on this subject in his book ‘Adapt: Why Success Always Starts With Failure’.  But failure means creating the possibility to learn: by learning we can revise to be better.  Embracing imperfection lets us navigate our way to the route of the problem and find a solution faster, and with more ease.

Extreme Strategy is about giving the client the bare minimum they need to understand the direction and provide constructive feedback, enabling the faster learning and iterative process required for Accelerated Iteration.

Extreme Strategy is used to create what is known as a ‘Minimum Viable Strategy’ (MVS).  The MVS enables us to do Accelerated Iteration.  The MVS is the minimum output one can produce to give the client an idea of exactly how the strategy will work.

The idea for the MVS is directly lifted from what in entrepreneurial circles is known as an MVP or ‘Minimum Viable Product’; a technology product (or feature) built purely to test a particular business hypothesis. And it is probably easier to explain this conceptually before moving on.

The MVP is built solely as a test; its purpose is to define whether making a product is viable prior to committing valuable resources. With an MVP the aesthetic and functionality (to a certain degree) is irrelevant; if the product is successful in testing it is not ready for launch, but the company has proof of its demand. Likewise if the product (or feature) fails, then realising its shortcomings earlier saves more time and resources.

The following is several short excerpts from Eric Ries’ book ‘The Lean Startup’ (2011). Here Ries discusses MVP’s for startups and entrepreneurs:

“A Minimum Viable Product (MVP) helps entrepreneurs start the process of learning as quickly as possible…Contrary to traditional product development, which usually involves a long, thoughtful incubation period, the goal of the MVP is to begin the process of learning, not end it…It’s goal is to test fundamental business hypotheses…Deciding how complex an MVP needs to be cannot be done formulaically.  It requires judgment…The lesson of the MVP is that any additional work beyond what was required to start learning is a waste…”

Extreme Strategy is the art of producing Planning’s version of the MVP – the MVS.  It enables us to return to the client with the bare minimum strategy and test the validity of our assumptions, hypotheses and approach.  This must be continuously followed and adhered to through the entire strategic process, in line with the Accelerated Iteration method.

To practice Extreme Strategy one must build MVS’s.  This means not being precious, and refuting the inner desire for pitch theatre glory, or merit attribution.

Remember that Planning is not about creating strategy for strategy’s sake, it is not about being the smartest in the room, and it most definitely is not about the perceived glory of pitch or presentation theatre. It is about problem solution and adding value to a clients’ business.

Extreme Strategy (used to create an MVS) with Accelerated Iteration is the most efficient way to get to a solution.

 

THE BENEFITS OF LEAN PLANNING

In the spirit of Lean Planning we have broken several of the benefits down into bullet points for more palatable consumption.  Of course these positive facets of the method are intertwined and hard to separate. If one finds that they cognitively start to blend into a larger picture, it is likely that this picture is one of logical conclusion; most of Lean Planning is defined by common sense.

  • Work/strategy sold:  Early, continuous client communication and feedback through the iterative cycle means the client is brought in early, and ‘buys-in’ to the direction.  This will produce a 100% (or close to) work sale rate for your Planning department when it comes to final presentation delivery*.

*This should filter down to more creative work sold in first time too as the client has everyone is aligned to the role the work plays in the wider strategy.

  • Relationships: It is likely that using the Lean Planning method will mean greater communication and greater collaboration between you and your client(s).  This should make the process smoother (note the term ‘should’, we make no guarantees – that’s up to you).  The client should not only be happier with the work you produce, but also enjoy working alongside their agency’s planning department more as a result.  Internal relationships should also benefit from less stress, previously caused by demoralising processes and lack of confirmed direction.
  • Stress (and absences): Using Lean Planning helps to avoid the exhausting pressure of delivering a strategy (and subsequent creative work) after several months or work, not knowing if the client will buy it or if failure waits in the wings.
  • Agility & efficiency: By employing Lean Planning, the client, Planner and wider team are quickly able to react to a change in brief with minimal fuss or wastage. It means getting to a solution in the shortest amount of time possible – this is efficient.
  • Time:  Greater efficiency denotes less time wasted on paths that lead to no fruition, for both client and agency.
  • Costs: Less time and less resources equals less costs for the agency and the client.
  • Efficacy:  By enabling the brief to organically develop and tweaking the strategy accordingly the final work produced by the agency should be more effective.  Again, this will depend on the agency and it’s ability to solve its client’s problems.

THINK SMALL (CHANGE)

Lean Planning will not work for every agency, every Planning department or every planner.  It may not suit some clients or their infrastructure. What we can be certain of is the amount of wastage in agencies’ current processes; much of this stems from the client to agency relationship and the way problems are defined and solved at a strategic level.  This causes myriad problems for all stakeholders, and reduces the productivity and effectiveness of the strategic process.

The future of planning, ‘Planning 3.0’ or planning in 2020 will be defined by more complex systems of strategic development and production to meet the more fragmented, proliferated communications world. Agencies and their Planning departments will work to navigate this more complex environment in a variety of successful and less successful ways.  Lean Planning is only one of the methods that will come out of the ether, but we believe it to be the simplest and most compelling.  We posit that Lean Planning requires small change, but leads to big difference.

We recommend you try it.

Shortlisted for the AdMap Prize 2012

Shortlisted for the AdMap Prize 2012

I have been shortlisted for the AdMap Prize 2012 next to some rather revered company.  Will post my essays (I submitted two) after publication in WARC.

ADMAP SHORTLIST

ADMAP SHORTLIST

APG Noisy Thinking Mini Series – Thursday 12th May 2012

APG Noisy Thinking Mini Series – Thursday 12th May 2012

Just attended the second session of the APG’s Noisy Thinking series of talks and it was rather interesting.

Speakers:

Andy Fennell, Group Marketing Director of Diageo

Mark Lund, Partner at NOW and former CEO of COI

Alison Hardy, owner of Headstrong Thinking and former Director of Marketing Services at Doctor Foster

All speakers chatted for 20 mins and had a different take on the Client – Planning relationship and what constituted ‘good’ planning vs ‘bad’ planning (to use Andy Fennell’s words).

Here’s my notes from the session.

Notes from APG Noisy Thinking

Notes from APG Noisy Thinking

Apologies for the scribbly nature of my musings but let me translate the more pertinent thoughts into more easy to read notes.

Andy Fennell – Saw ‘good’ planning as simple, reduced down, thinking that positively effects the broader objectives of the business.

Mark Lund – Argued that ‘good’ planning is the ability to identify the usable ‘stuff’ amongst the wealth of other ‘stuff’, and build enough trust with clients to make the necessary ‘leap of faith’ often needed to meet business objectives

Alison Hardy – Postulated that ‘good’ planning is the ability to know where the agency (and their work) fits in to the daily, weekly and longer term client context.

The central theme.

For me the common theme that permeated the three speakers’ talks was the notion of relationships being central to the planning function; for it is relationships that unlock the understanding needed to impact client business.  This does not necessarily mean a Planner is someone who  takes the client out for a proper good knees up, but has the ability to easily (and painlessly) extrapolate the necessary information needed to understand a client and their business  well enough to create positive change.

There will always be a tension between time and understanding: the more time we can afford to give to something the more likely we are to understand it.  However the pragmatist knows (as Alison Hardy quite directly pointed out) that time is not always on our (and our clients’) side.  Therefore the skill lies in how one utilises the available time (both our own and our clients’) that becomes the key differentiator.

The key takeout.

So for me the hypothesis (based on tonights speakers) is this:

‘Good’ planning starts with the ability to use the available resources to extract the information needed to positively effect clients’ business.

Let me know your thoughts.

Animated GIF’s – A selection

Animated GIF’s – A selection
My Favourite Animated GIF

My Favourite Animated GIF

I’ve been feeling pretty uninspired lately. Recent events have conspired to make me feel like the spirit of the web has been lost to a more corporate ‘how can I monetise this’ soul (and this is from a guy who works in advertising).

But, after looking at some animated GIF’s (and a few bits of other more dark matter), I am now back on board, and have rekindled my love for all things mashed-up and collective.

Here’s a few more:

Punch

Punch

anigorilla

anigorilla

You may have to click on this next one, but it’s pretty cool.

dain_04

dain_04

Homer

Homer

Raphael on Acid

Raphael on Acid

Espionage – Kingston Launch48 – 2011

Espionage – Kingston Launch48 – 2011

Here is the Prezi we delivered at Launch48 Kingston last year.

Launch 48 is a weekend hackathon in the UK.  Developers, designers, businesspeople and such get together to create prototypes and launch businesses.

It’s pretty good fun, and provides a lot of opportunity to mingle with like (and unlike) minded people.  Even if you’re not in it to 100% commit beyond a weekend.

ESPIONAGE LINK

We start as Anakin, and end like Darth Vader (with no helmet)

We start as Anakin, and end like Darth Vader (with no helmet)
Daddy Darth

Daddy Darth

As I grow older I understand my self more, or at least I think I do.

I of course don’t mean my ‘self’ in terms of consciousness, in fact that gets more elusive the more I search.  What I speak of is those little things; like needing at least 6 hours sleep a night, being a rather noisy eater, my need for constant validation, and a tendency to over-complicate, then over-simplify all in the same sentence.

Those things.

So innocent and full of hope

So innocent and full of hope

You see we all start life a bit like Anakin Skywalker.  We are young, hopeful, bold, liberal, and full of dreams.  We believe anything is possible.  Sure, we’re not really too certain of whether we like slush puppies, McDonald’s, or both mixed together, but it doesn’t matter because life is our little experiment to mash up and define – no one can take it away from us.  We are all in our own pod racers and we don’t care, no risk is too risky.  It’ll all be ok.

Teenagers

Teenagers

As we grow older we get a little pubescent, we become angry at the world and the gift it’s given us.  How dare our parents love us, how dare our parents disagree with our mild dope smoking habits, how dare Obi-Wan prevent us from using the force just for shits and giggles.

We rebel.

Then as we grow something changes.  We become very set in our ways.  We become closed off to new experiences and ‘learnings’, we ‘know what we like’.

By this point we have made many decisions so many times we don’t question them anymore.  Our brains make so many mental shortcuts and subconsciously recognises so many cues, beliefs and norms, that we run on autopilot a lot of the time.

We live inside our very own ‘armour of darkness’.

Darth Vader

We all put up walls

So what do we do? We have kids; we tell them how ‘our’ world is, we tell them what we think, and we permeate their childhood with our thinking.  So much so that as our children grow they don’t recognise us, they don’t see past the armour, they see us as the parent figure.

They see us as the ‘dark side’.

After time our offspring grow up, and we realise our mistakes.  We start to connect with our inner ‘Anakin’ and slowly reveal this sensitive soul to them.

“Luke, I am your father…”

But by this point it is too late, they are lost for good, and we have probably grounded them, cut off their pocket money, or if they’re really non-compliant, cut their hands off with a light sabre.

Is this a scene from your house?

A scene you know too well?

“Noooooooo, I’ll never join you…”

Unfortunately, it is not until we have a large life event that we truly learn to take off our helmet.  It is not until Episode VI: Return of the Jedi that we learn to connect, and by this time the Emperor has buggered us for good.

Don't end up like Sebastian Shaw

Don't end up like Sebastian Shaw

Of course, as luck would have it, we now look like a boiled egg in a very pathetic sack, breathing like a wet dog that’s got arthritic lungs and our children just feel sorry for us.  Not a great look if I’m honest.

So what is the lesson learned here?

Try as hard as you can to know where you stop, and your armour starts, they are not mutually exclusive.

Sure, it’s good to protect yourself; even Darth Vader did well for a while. But eventually a young Padawan will come along and cause you hella’ problems, and you’ll wish you’d have listened to Obi-Wan in the first place.

Remember, anything is better than having to watch stupid Ewoks celebrating in a crappy jungle somewhere.

We all start as Anakin, and end like Darth Vader.  Just try to do it with the armour down, as you will end up looking like an egg, and it’s not a good look, even in 3D.

For Darth Vader’s advice on how to be a better father please click here

People of the second chance

Great iconography, if not a little religious

Neoteny, John Keats, and Peter Pan

Neoteny, John Keats, and Peter Pan
Baby Face

Baby Face

Last year I read a blog post that really struck a chord. Here it is:

“Neoteny is the retention of childlike attributes in adulthood. Human beings are younger longer than any other creature on earth, taking almost twenty years until we become adults. While we retain many our childlike attributes into adulthood most of us stop playing when we become adults and focus on work.

When we are young, we learn, we socialize, we play, we experiment, we are curious, we feel wonder, we feel joy, we change, we grow, we imagine, we hope.

In adulthood, we are serious, we produce, we focus, we fight, we protect and we believe in things strongly.

The future of the planet is becoming less about being efficient, producing more stuff and protecting our turf and more about working together, embracing change and being creative.

We live in an age where people are starving in the midst of abundance and our greatest enemy is our own testosterone driven urge to control our territory and our environments.

It’s time we listen to children and allow neoteny to guide us beyond the rigid frameworks and dogma created by adults.”

(Joi Ito, 2009)

After sharing an article with a similar theme (on neoteny) around work, a colleague pointed out it’s semblance to John Keats’ Negative Capability.  

“Negative capability is the ability to perceive and to think more than any presupposition of human nature allows. It describes the capacity of human beings to reject the totalizing constraints of a closed context, and to both experience phenomenon free from any epistemological bounds as well as to assert their own will and individuality upon their activity. The term was first used by the Romantic poet John Keats to critique those who sought to categorize all experience and phenomena and turn them into a theory of knowledge. It has recently been appropriated by philosopher and social theorist Roberto Mangabeira Unger to comment on human nature and to explain how human beings innovate and resist within confining social contexts.”

(Wikipedia, 2012)

 So what do you think?

I would suggest that there is some cross-over with these two concepts.  At it’s most base one could posit that (the) more neotenous states produce increased levels of ‘negative capability’.  Ergo, the ability to consciously identify social constraints, and then think, act or work outside of them is directly correlated to the ability to be more ‘child like’ in one’s thinking.

What seems to be prevalent in evolutionary theory is that as a species, we are becoming more neotenous: physiologically and psychologically.

Yes, according to some, we are becoming less ‘developed’ in appearance, and retaining more of our child like traits into adulthood.  No, this does not mean that we, as a species, are becoming evolutionarily stunted, in fact far from it.  What it means is that fundamental to our species evolving, is the trend of adopting a ”greater prolongation of childhood and retardation of maturity” (Gould, 1996, pg. 150).

Simply put, as we evolve two things are happening:

  • We are keeping our ‘baby faces’:  flattened face, broadened face, large brain, hairless body, hairless face, small nose, reduction of brow ridge, small teeth, small upper jaw (maxilla), small lower jaw (mandible), thinness of skull bones, limbs proportionately short compared to torso length, longer leg than arm length, larger eyes, and upright stance.
  •  The qualities we revere in our children are hanging around longer and longer from generation to generation. Our ability to “learn, socialize, play, experiment, be curious, feel wonder, feel joy, change, grow, imagine, hope” [SIC] is becoming (as homo sapiens) more enduring.
We are evolving to evolve less - if that makes sense

We are evolving to evolve less - if that makes sense

I’m sorry, but I find this all (if true) very inspiring.

Theoretically, you are more neotenous than your parents; you are more able to be ‘child-like’ in your thinking than the generation that preceded yours.  You are better equipped to learn, play, experiment, change, and so on; so no more not learning a language “cos you are too old”.

Taking it further, your children will be more neotenous than you.  That feeling of not wanting your children to grow up is loosely being answered by evolution, and the best part is your children will be more intelligent because of it (not little babies wanting their mummies aged 36).

If we collate all of this information, then consider our earlier discussion on the hypothetical correlation between neoteny and John Keats’ ‘Negative Capability’, then this becomes quite interesting.

Hypothesis:

If we (as a species) are becoming more neotenous, then arguably our (individual & collective) potential to think outside of social constraints and boundaries is increasing too.

Questions:

  • Is this evolution ‘all relative’? Is the length of time we are neotenous dependant on how long we live?  Is the percentage of time neotenous consistent in terms of lifespan?  Has it always been (for example) 25%, but because we live longer now, a longer span of time is spent in neoteny?
  • If the question above is not true, are future generations going to spend the majority (or all) of their lives more neotenous? What will be the impact of this?
The epitome of neoteny and negative capability

The epitome of neoteny and negative capability

Summary:

What’s really beautiful about the idea of being more neotenous and more able to enforce ‘negative capability’ (and forgive me for romanticising the thought just a little), is that it’s very similar to the popular J.M. Barrie story ‘Peter Pan’.

Think about it.

The story of a boy, who never grows up.

The story of a protagonist that continues to display key signs of neoteny and ‘negative capability’: the ”greater prolongation of childhood and retardation of maturity” and “the capacity to reject the totalizing constraints of a closed context, and to both experience phenomenon free from any epistemological bounds as well as to assert their own will and individuality upon their activity.”

I don’t want to sway you, but your descendants may be lost boys.

How exciting…

Collections, Branding & Sales Promotions

Collections, Branding & Sales Promotions

What is the purpose of collecting?

Why do we do it?

Is it natural human phenomena that drives us, or an intrinsic personality default that cries out for validation and identity in a difficult to navigate world?

These are difficult questions indeed, but worth exploring, especially when you have blog posts and articles in the Washington Post that draw reference to the box debate:  grown men talking about some lady biscuits.

How do you like Barbie's 'box'?
How do you like Barbie’s ‘box’?

There are two points made quite well by our cheeky chappy in the above excerpt. What ulterior psychology is at play here? And what is it about our desire to retain the physical decorum of items we have never actually used? What is it about the fastidious nature of collecting that really appeals? And, more importantly is there some value to be gained by liberating people from their collections?

Here are some of the weird and wonderful things people collect:

Fluffy Stuff

Fluffy Stuff

Puke Bags

Puke Bags

Burnt Food

Burnt Food

Augustine Birrell said that “Libraries are not made, they grow”.  This is probably also true of collections (for libraries are just collections with purpose and pertaining ‘business model’).  No one intends to start collecting, it just happens.  It ‘snowballs’, as they say.

I would argue that this is because of our (conscious and subconscious) desire to be consistent, and satiate the brains innate need to create mental heuristics.  We like stuff or we don’t, we like it more than something else, or we don’t. It is worth the mark up, or it isn’t.

In a way this is similar to sales promotions.  By driving trial through discounts, we hope that over time and usage (preferably less of course), consumers will build an affiliation to our brand that is strong enough for them to buy our offering at full price, or even better, inflated price.

Ultimately, we use inertia to create increased value for the item by tapping in to the psychological desire to do what we have done before.

Thus, branding is the business of instilling the cues collections organically achieve. Once we do something, we often don’t question why we do it the second time, we just do.

I wonder how many people can’t explain their collections.

Thinking about it, I wonder how many people can’t explain their brand preferences either.

Don’t Follow ‘Trends’, Follow Trends.

Don’t Follow ‘Trends’, Follow Trends.

I’ve been told I have a few hundred words to talk about ‘trends’. This is my ‘in a nut-shell’, Twitter-esque, less than 140 characters brief (a la Dave Trott) and I intend to stick to it.

Trend?

Trend?

I have decided, in a rare moment of rebelliousness to veer the conversation away from our modern day communications use of this word ‘trends’. I know this may seem a little counter intuitive and perhaps a tad Guy Fawkesian of me but I am doing this for two valid reasons; firstly in the words of Howard Moon “I eat boundaries”, and secondly I find the repetitive nature of predicting/reporting ‘trends’ well…repetitive.  It is also now almost March making the need for a trends prediction 1/6th less relevant, unless one commits to a sliding scale of declining relevancy through the year – in which case I refuse to do the math.

For example, for years it’s been the supposed ‘Year of Mobile’, and to be honest it’s getting pretty difficult to understand why we haven’t realised that there won’t be one, it’s already here. To bastardise a very famous strap-line coined within the same service sphere: “The Future is Mobile” (not only this but so is the present, and the recent past as well). Apparently now it seems every year must be dedicated to the adoption of one or more trend, innovation or technology.

Trend?

Trend?

Let’s get back to the post.

There are two key points I have on the issue of trends that for the purposes of your entertainment I have tenuously linked through the mechanic of a game/riddle. This challenge will be extended at the end of this piece, and I invite you to participate as much as possible, there will be prizes given by way of virtue and brownie points to whoever succeeds (it will also validate me in a way 3 star completion of an Angry Birds level never could).

Let’s start (word count update = 307).

Question: Where does the word ‘trend’ come from?

Don’t worry I didn’t know either, however thanks to the Mark Forsyth book ‘The Etymologicon’ (which I would thoroughly recommend) I have since been inspired to find out.

The term ‘trend’ can be dated back to approximately 1598 where it meant “to run or bend in a certain direction”, with specific allude to rivers and coasts. It is commonly believed that ‘trend’ has its origins in the Middle English ‘trenden’ which has evolved from Old English ‘trendan’ meaning “to roll about, turn, revolve”. This (we think) disseminated from the Proto-Germanic ‘trandijanan’ or “to revolve” which is similar to the Old English ‘trinde’ (“ball”) and ‘tryndel’ (“circle, ring”), and it is here that the trail runs cold.

Trend?

Trend?

So for those who are interested the term ‘trend’ could be perceived to imply a turn or circle, far from the upward curve of tendency we have commonly come to think it to connote. In communications we predominantly use the ‘trend’ to head up the beginning or end of year document that gets shared around to stakeholders and generously throws out compound words like there’s no tomorrow; similar to this then.

It is my contention that too many in our world focus on ‘trends’, and this in itself becomes both a fallacy and self-fulfilling prophecy, probably orchestrated by some spotty research company intern who knows the owner of a small time games manufacturer in San Fran who specialises in GPS augmentation decoding, or some such BS.

So let’s do a game (slash riddle) based on the origins of the word ‘trend’ and not it’s modern day connotation.

Here’s how it works.

The following are sets of coordinates that can be entered into Google Maps. Once these coordinates are entered you should find specific locations (relatively near coastlines or ‘trends’) that if collected and looked at carefully will in some way indicate a great figure in our industry. One may have to play around with the letters and do a little problem solving, but I can assure you when you get to the end there will be an enormous digital pat on the back for you.

Trend?

Trend?

Here are the trends, do email me if you think you have it (and you will have to explain how you got the answer so no guessing).

-2.618717, 51.279298

51.465214, -2.589722

40.866938, -73.531799

44.166636, 12.242126

Good luck.

Joe

Final word count = 749 (732 for WordPress). Brevity was never my strong suit.