Hello and welcome once again. So…as is customary, let us talk of weather. I am cautiously optimistic and am slowly easing shorts into the wardrobe but coupled with a thermal vest and fisherman’s jumper. It is a look I tell thee. Anyway, hope you’re well. There are a collection of links for link-based clicking and a couple of thoughts that you may want to read.
The first thing that has been occupying me came by way of a couple of stories. JP Morgan is mandating 5 days in the office for its senior staff. Amazon are wanting people to go back, as laid out in Andy Jassy’s letter to shareholders. And in the UK (with a coup for the Sub Editor of City AM) Lloyd’s of London chief, John Neal, is telling people to stop being “TWaTs” and come into the office on other days too. (To be fair, the Lloyd’s of London headline is more inflammatory than the content, with John Neal actually being quite conciliatory and saying that flexibility has to be key ie some weeks you may be in five days, on quieter weeks you may only be in for one).
Why does this grab my attention? One because the reasons given are all very similar – citing innovation or culture:
“Being together greatly benefits mentoring, learning, collaboration and execution — it is truly the foundation of our culture.” JP Morgan
“The energy and riffing on one another’s ideas happen more freely, and many of the best Amazon inventions have had their breakthrough moments from people staying behind after a meeting and working through ideas on a whiteboard… It’s also significantly easier to learn, model, practice, and strengthen our culture when we’re in the office together most of the time and surrounded by our colleagues” Amazon
“If you really want to be innovative… you need to be collected together” Lloyd’s of London
I find the stated and implied reasons for any business wanting to do anything very interesting. Because I want to know what has led them to that conclusion. Not to say it isn’t valid, but is it a belief or an evidence backed claim? Because maybe it is the innovation and the culture. And maybe there are hard facts about how many innovations they’ve come up with pre and post pandemic (if anyone would have them Amazon would), but maybe it’s as this article seems to suggest and it’s symbolic on behalf of the businesses as a sign that Covid-19 really is over, and/or symptomatic of old school thinking.
Digging on the subject there does seem to be information if you are interested – this NYT magazine article has a good representation of the situation for America and what (and who) it is employing to try and handle it. Some studies have tried to dig up some facts. This one published in Nature suggests that screen work curbs creativity (but looking at the task people are asked to do and the set up, I would disagree that this represents anything that resembles a creative task OR how people come up with ideas). And if you really want to get stuck in, please lose yourself in Nick Bloom who appears to be the eminent expert on this kind of thing.
Or maybe it’s just the disconnect between what business wants and what employees want. And although this is playing out via remote or hybrid working right now with , 85% of employees want to remain in a hybrid working model and most consultants saying that, flexibility is the key to attracting and retaining talent - but it is represented in other, wider studies I’m seeing too, such as the latest Bright Network research.
I just thought this told its own story. With the overall idea being that companies want you to care about them and be passionate about what they do, and employees not really realising that it matters so much. Perhaps it is harder to understand how much people care about the work when they aren’t in the office?
So after all of that, what’s my takeaway? I’m afraid that it’s going to be a little mundane and boils down to “just because you like something don’t expect everyone else to feel the same”. (Personally I love being able to work from home and love that my work allows me to but I know it’s not for everyone). Basically, a little understanding can go a long way.
Whatever you think though, don’t let it be another thing that polarizes us even further urgghhhhhh.
Anyway…enough of that ramble..onto more clicking!
The standard CHAT GPT Section
Okay okay..I’m still mildly obsessed with Chat GPT. And I don’t even use it that much. I do seem to have a thing of just loving to click on any article about it. Especially as so many are offering advice and/or doom-dripping headlines that make future working life seem utterly pointless. I have found a couple of commentators that have got something interesting to say, however.
If you don’t already, please follow Ethan Mollick (or sign up to his newsletter). Always thought provoking.
As it comes into more of a work-based environment, Kevin Delaney is talking to some interesting people. This week it wrangles the thoughts of George Westerman (MIT) and his research and study into the “human” skills that are critical in keeping us relevant as meat puppets as we slavishly obey our digital overlords.
Then find out 35 other things that people use AI for.
And how it can streamline your life by getting it to work for YOU and do all your mundane shizzle.
Other stuff that has come to me this month
1. Warc are doing a collection of cross podcasts (from Fergus Carroll’s show) about effectiveness in advertising. On it they spoke to James Hurman about creativity and its power for effectiveness. Quite honestly, from being a creative, I found this so interesting. You have to give a lil ‘chapeau’ to the research and the codification of everything to make it useful and also powerful for businesses to understand. Essentially, they’ve dug into the IPA effectiveness awards and cross referenced against creative award wins to discover whether creativity delivers results. Leading to the conclusion that” creatively-awarded campaigns deliver 11 times the return on investment of non-creatively awarded campaigns. The creatively awarded campaigns in the IPA Effectiveness Databank (1996 – 2014) drove 11 times the market share gains at the equivalent level of share of voice.” This is why creatives need time to do the campaign.
Read more here
2. And on another creative tack, these two articles are kinda plucking at the same string. That is, that effective creative is sometimes just memorable.
https://www.brandingmag.com/nick-barthram/dont-ask-your-audience-to-think-feel-or-do-ask-them-to-remember/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://hellgatenyc.com/heres-why-youre-seeing-gross-viral-recipes-on-your-subway-commute
3. The following two are about copywriting.
The first is Dave Dye letting loose about posters and advertising. There are some very succinct points in here that are definitely worth paying attention to and (if you read it) the way he changes the copy in recognisable ads to see why they work is genius. Your ads do reflect who you are, you should pay attention to what you say and how you say it. People will judge you on it.
https://davedye.com/2023/04/12/another-post-on-posters/
The second is a very old piece but came to mind when I was doing some research on competitors for a client, some of whom I didn’t recognise. I did have this creeping feeling mentioned in the article, namely, that people sometimes are so intent on spinning some web of branding sentiment they forget to say what they do and why I should care.
4. And in another pairing of articles. Have a look at two articles which detail how everything looks the same and see what you think…very interesting.
https://www.alexmurrell.co.uk/articles/the-age-of-average
https://medium.com/knowable/why-everything-looks-the-same-bad80133dd6e
5. This is good employer branding
6. Thank heavens someone is trying to be funny in british ads again (and no, shouting a catchphrase is not funny so ‘simples’ doesn’t count).
7. I love this stuff from MSCHF – it’s so last month but I missed the boat with it on the last send out and as I use this for my memory as well as your enjoyment I had to bung it in.
K, that’s enough now love you byeeeee.