I'm SURE It's DONE!

I have my fair share of self-doubt – or more precisely, I’ll give someone else the benefit of the doubt. I could be very sure about something, but perhaps in the context of something else, I could be wrong. And in my world, my goal is to just find out what went sideways and fix it. Then find ways to prevent a repeat of that particular error.

Memory is an interesting thing. I can remember details of events that are truly insignificant, and then forget that one thing I needed at the supermarket.

So in the course of a busy day at the agency, if I’m *sure* that something was this way or that, it happened, I’m sure I did it – but someone else says, ‘no way, I did not get X’; then I think – well, I could be wrong. And for me, the last thing I'll do is waste time arguing the point and say, ‘Prove it to me. Show me your work.'

I’d look like a total jerk.

Instead, I investigate. What went wrong, and if so, why? And then I want to figure out how to prevent that error – to ensure that it does not happen again. I’m not creating CYA, I’m refining process.

Where was the breakdown? Evaluate process, tools and people. Remind everyone we're in it together. To make the process of doing the day-to-day easier.

So, in the scenario, for a period of time, they did their job and I didn’t do mine.

Who is wrong? Is someone being a jerk because they never admit a mistake, or that they forgot to do something?

But...when I find that I was right - that the other person didn’t do their job, fix the error, pass it along, save it to the server. Perhaps, like me, they were sure they did X, but didn’t. They should fess-up. Yep. They should admit it, 'My bad.' 

Most often, that original declaration of ‘I did do X' is stated in the presence of others. When I confirm that I did my part, and the other person did not, the truth is usually revealed in private.

I look stupid. The other person looks brilliant. Together. Efficient.

So what do you do? Point out what a jerk they are?

Nope, that makes you look like a jerk yourself.

You have a conversation with that person and they say, ‘Oh, okay, I forgot to do X.’ And that’s it. Your reputation of not-having-it-together lives on in the minds of others.

I hate that. Because I’m smart, and I care about doing a Really. Good. Job.

So, processes and tools are put in place so everything gets done with a level of transparency – documentation with collaboration – then you don’t have to rely on your memory. Or someone else’s. And no one looks like a loser with bad habits and, even worse, a weak memory.

This is not CYA, by the way. This is good process to ensure everything gets done, everyone knows what they need to do and work moves along with minimal errors.

And no one looks like a jerk. Unless they are just jerks.​

Now, does Target carry staple guns?​

Collaboration the Old Fashioned Way

This post started out as a primer on collaboration – the old fashioned way. In analog.

Just like all that stuff you do on a computer – that used to be done with pencil and paper on a drawing board – planning and collaboration was done in analog. Index cards on a corkboard / comps taped up, and then the evolution to Post-its® on a wall.

I believe that’s the way it should be done – now. Any big project (read: expensive/time consuming/massive possibilities to final product) needs everyone working together – collaboratively.

As I am a HUGE proponent of getting a handle on the costs and time associated with a project – up front, and getting a client to sign-off prior to start-work, I’m also a huge proponent of awe-inspiring creative.

The other day I wrote (which is probably a Duh! moment for many) about gathering everyone together and fleshing out ideas. As well as taking into consideration – cost, talent, availability, technology – before presenting to the client. But the article I referred to in my post made me realize that perhaps only the creative is being fleshed-out, but not the mechanics of production.

Call me crazy, but as a project manager (or producer) I see my role as one who not only ensures your fabulous ideas get done (along with everything else in the agency), but that we make money.

That’s how we stay in business.

I love great creative and never want to compromise it because someone didn’t do their homework. Or worse, says yes to the client, and tries to figure out execution later.

Sometimes clients – even though the ideas are innovative, original, and truly awesome – don’t have the money to do what you designed.

You spent the time, figured out how to execute, gathered the best minds/talent/tools, and everyone loves it. But it costs too much. Finding out monetary limitations after-the-fact is no way to do business.

Therein lies the problem. You both want it so much. No money. How do you cut a little out here and there and still retain everything you both want?

Who takes the hit? Great ideas need to be funded. You either cut, or you (and your vendors) and your client each take a share of the hit.

Not to mention, as an agency, you have bills to pay and other clients to tend to. And that *other* work may not be as exciting or innovative – but it does pay the bills. And you do like all of your clients.

This is the reality of true collaboration – everyone needs to be in the room. Including me.

Check out this video of a Google Hangout on Agile Creativity. And also check out the Google page on Creativity Insights.

In the video, John Boiler of 72andSunny talks about their workwall, which is exactly what it says. They pin-up their ideas, everyone discusses, then leave/comeback and do it again. (He’s working on a digital form of the workwall.)

The Google page has a simple list of tips on agile creativity. There’s also a downloadable version. I especially like what Rei Inamoto of AKQA has to say about a fast (four hour) cycle of briefing/concepting/presenting. More time doesn’t mean better creative.

John Boiler states that he wants to take their workwall to a 2.0-version - make it digital. I'll have to contact him to see if they are there yet, because I still like the idea of literally being in one room. The interaction is immediate and everyone is hearing what's being said at the same time. How do you get that with an online environment. Is everyone truly engaged in the moment?

The bottom line: we do need to ensure whatever we create can be done, and the client can pay for it, and that there are actually enough hours in the day. And we know that throwing more bodies at a project doesn’t mean it gets done faster – so don’t even go there.

What do you think? How does your agency handle innovative solutions AND ensure they can be done – on time, in budget, and super awesomely without compromise?​

So the Client Didn’t Fire You. Start Planning Better.

Yesterday I wrote about an agency that showed a client awesome, and gave them an estimate with a caveat of ‘budget uncertainties’. What’s disturbing to me is that the author of the article works for a major digital firm that shouldn’t make this kind of mistake.

I'll say this nicely – if your budget uncertainties are enough to derail the project significantly, should they turn into realities – where a plus or minus (aka contingency) is not factored in and agreed to by both parties – then you should not proceed on the project.

You don’t have enough information to move forward. You have a fabulous idea with wonderful creative and some numbers. That’s it.

Budget uncertainties will kill your project in one way or another. It can also kill your agency if this is generally accepted practice.

So, do your discovery and research for creative and execution.

Now I’ll piss some people off…I see this more in the digital / mobile area than any other area of advertising. I have reasons to believe this. Inexperience. Fear of clients, colleagues or vendors. Lack of knowledge.

Inexperience
I have witnessed it first-hand. Digital is in huge demand. Therefore, the bar can be set pretty low. Lots of inexperience. So, a person can work in a digital agency, gain some experience, and move their way up the food chain where the demands, budgets and risks are much higher. Someone who knows the lingo may be clueless to risk as it applies to scope, budgets and timelines.

Fear
Those who are client-facing, usually Account or Producers / Project Managers, may not have the depth of experience in scoping, estimating, project management, sourcing, negotiating, arguing, writing a purchase order with restrictions, managing internal deliverables, risk and mitigation planning, and managing client expectations (as well as those of your colleagues). But saying yes is so...easy.

Knowledge
What I am witnessing in the digital and mobile areas is that the demand is high, the staff is young and inexperienced, and everyone is highly driven. I’m not saying you are stupid. You are just making rookie mistakes. Everyone must understand that they are part of running a business - first. 

And by the way rookies, I have also personally witnessed veterans who give it away every day because they think they can circumvent the potholes that will kill their project.

Then there's the ever-changing landscape of apps, platforms and whatever else anyone can dream up – that you have to keep on top of – all the time.

Give everyone an education. Pull everyone into a room to flesh-out the scope, budget and timeline. And make that a mandatory meeting. I guarantee that an hour (or two), in that one meeting, will save hundreds of hours (and dollars) down the line.

What happens in that meeting? Talk about possibilities; flesh out the good ones (that are achievable); everyone must poke holes in the scenarios and execution – and explain why (that is the education part); shout out every issue that can and will affect cost/timeline, and be realistic. Take into consideration what everyone has on their plate during the life of the project – you should be able to see everyone’s schedule (just sayin’).  

Speak up! Here’s your chance to clue everyone in on the pain you endure every day to fix the things they committed you to…without asking first.

And before you fall in love with something, find out if it can be done. Cost, schedule, requirements. Bring that back to the group and make sure it fits – before presenting to the client.

I absolutely love great creative and an awesome experience. I hate parsing out the good stuff because someone didn’t do their homework.

Tomorrow, collaboration. The old-fashioned way.​​

Does your Client Require Collaborative Software?

Is your client asking for better access to information? Real-time updates? File-sharing?

Are you pitching a client that requires a collaborative system to be in place – and functioning – before they even consider your agency?

Clients want a better working relationship with their agencies. They don’t want to wait for updates, and feel (either right or wrong) that more collaboration leads to greater efficiencies.

For an in-house department, you need to work closely with your ‘internal clients’. Often, they feel you work for them and they deserve to know – right now – what’s going on with their projects.

I know, sometimes you want them out of your hair so you can work. But read on. This is good for you…

In comes…ta da! Collaborative software.
It’s a common space to not only share, but aggregate information that provides all users with real-time data and reduces redundancy, errors, and captures that basic stuff that can fall through the cracks.

These days, more and more clients are requiring their agencies to provide an increased level of collaboration – through systems that document progress and share files as you work through a project.

There’s a lot more transparency with these systems. Therefore, everyone needs to be on their ‘A’ Game and…best behavior. That means – you must use the software as it was intended – entering updates, uploading files, or whatever your defined process requires. And I mean diligently.

We’ve all done a version ‘collaboration’ through email for years. There are servers full of terabytes of old CYA email – a lot of it with attachments. Time to put that data in one place that was designed for collaboration.

With these programs, there is no need to search through email; documents on your desktop or server; or in one or more ‘systems’ you currently use. What a waste of time.

A Forbes article says this:

“Apparently most of us prefer to communicate via email rather than face-to-face or over the phone – the average employee spends 28 hours per week writing emails and searching for information mostly contained within emails. Choosing a tool that facilitates natural interaction among individuals instead of the static nature of email is the first step to adding value and driving efficiencies in managing everyday tasks…” (emphasis added)

28 hours. Way too much time. And I know that email is THE hardest habit to break.

But get with the program and reduce all that extra work. Get everything in one place – and make sure everyone with [appropriate] access contributes. Collaborators from Creative to Accounting are entering data relevant to the project. From specs, to schedules, to estimates and updates – all the way through to billing.

Whether it’s an internal or external client, collaborative tools make the exchange (and tracking) of information more efficient, and more….collaborative.

Are you using collaborative software? I’d love to hear from you.​

Closing the Great Divide – Or Integrating Your Agency

I am actually going to go down this slippery slope...​

I have worked in and with agencies that have severe silo problems. Digital and traditional (online and offline – or whatever description du jour) work separately – but in a parallel universe.  Wasteful.

In my personal experience, I found the digital folks think that those on the traditional side have no way of EVER understanding their world.

Conversely, the traditional folks think the digital know-it-alls are way-over-stating it.

What I have also witnessed in the digital world, is that there are either extremely stringent producers/project managers who control every-person’s every-move; or they’re extremely loose and kind of shoot from the hip to get work done – they just run around asking where’s this or that.

Traditional producers/project managers are in their groove and with the exception of some technology advancements, have pretty much the same parameters in managing work as they’ve had for years. Life is good and what’s the fuss?

Digital and traditional are different. And I get it.

Well, knowing that nothing is insurmountable, and most employees are capable of learning, I believe we can actually integrate digital and traditional.

And that’s good for an agency.

I don’t need to learn to code, and you don’t need to learn how to put ink on paper, or edit video. But we all need to know what it takes to get those things done.

There’s a big bonus when knowledge is shared: Communication with your client is clear and accurate (sure we can do X in Y time for Z budget – it's not a guess, or worse, over-promised), better utilization of resources and assets, and consistency in brand and message. But I shouldn’t have to tell you that.

So we travel to an agency in Sweden called Honesty and they’re going for their version of agency 2.0. The belief is that everyone should understand how to produce digital as well as traditional – even getting rid of their specific titles – wow.

I agree with this – and hope the great divide between disciplines is actually bridged – because I’ve seen too much of holding info close – not letting others in because it’s so complicated.

In an article in AdAge, the agency’s CEO, Walter Naeslund says:

“It just doesn't make sense anymore to have separate staff to handle a separate area which is inherently impossible to separate from anything else…To achieve speed we attack organizational overhead and inertia by putting all our efforts into integrating strategy, storytelling, design, advertising, PR and production under one roof, one strategic account director and one creative team...To our clients this will mean better results in shorter time and at better prices. To Honesty it will mean a lot of new learning, more creative control, better output and further improved profitability.”

Control, better output and improved profitability.

Makes sense, doesn’t it?​

Getting Your House in Order

There’s been a lot in the news, blogs, talking heads – you name it – about the recent decision by Yahoo! to bring all their workers back to the office. No more working from home.

I’ve read doomsday reports on everything from destroying families to losing top talent.

But the bigger issue is that Yahoo! has been in trouble for a long time. They’ve gone through plenty of CEOs in the last few years, and yet they’re just not turning around.

The survival of a large company is at stake here. There are over 14,000 employees who rely on the fact that they stay in business. Could they fail? Sure can. And I’ll bet there wouldn’t be a government bailout available to them.

When a company is in trouble, whether it be Yahoo! or your local ad agency, you have to step back and take a look at everything. From the way the owners/partners manage, to how every individual performs – and exactly what they do or don’t do for your bottom line.

Just because you have been ‘doing it this way for years’ doesn’t mean it’s a successful strategy in this decade (or even this year). Entrenched procedures, seniority based on longevity, or territorial behavior keep you stuck in 1995.

The ability to make changes, and for employees to adapt to those changes quickly, is imperative in today’s economy. Working from home is not a right – it is a bonus that is gained through an efficient process. That process must be well-defined and followed. Only then effective collaboration takes place.

I predict that some Yahoo! employees will leave, some will be fired, and many will come to the office every day. Change and the transition process can be difficult - but are not insurmountable.

I find it odd that a tech company, whose employees should be embracing on-going change, find that this new edict is so outrageous. Yep, going into the office seems to be so antiquated (and inconvenient), but if employees engage in this first step, they could actually be a part of the solution. Do it, contribute, and find a better way to work remotely. Imagine that.

Yes, I’ve read the stats on increased productivity when working remotely. Yes, retaining top talent is important, but the company just needs to do an old-fashioned inventory.

Yahoo! doesn’t know where they are right now, but this step – as backward (but oh-so-basic) as it seems – will give them the hard data they need to move forward. Once inventory is done, they will know the value of the stock on hand and how to sell it. They need to clear out space so they can do the improvements that ‘everybody’ says they need. Like update their site and make it more relevant.

Ad agencies and in-house marketing departments must do the same. Take inventory of technology you use, processes to manage work, and your staff. Any one of those areas can be a drag on the other two. Get those in order, set the ground-rules, then offer work-from-home options should that fit your culture.

Remember: Profits hide a multitude of sins. Do an annual inventory. Don’t wait until you’re in trouble.

Open Space, Culture and Creating Collisions

I’ve said it before – I just don’t agree with this trend for an open office. It’s unproductive.

This article in Inc. Magazine, talks about Tony Hsieh and his comments on collisions, serendipity, or whatever. It’s a way to force people to interact with one-another by forcing them to enter, leave, or go to the bathroom by taking a different route past someone’s desk. Usually the desk of an individual with which they don’t have anything relevant to discuss – thus creating a collision that is, in my world, a disruption.

Or worse, a real annoyance. There’s got to be some balance here.

I don’t believe in collisions – you either have something to say to someone – or you don’t. Creating collisions it is like going to a Match.com mixer to find a date. That isn’t serendipity. It’s pre-meditated.

Although one comment in his article horrified me about Zappos – they lock all but one entrance, so they create collisions. I’m thinking that Mr. Hsieh made a misstatement. At least I hope so.

Anyway, serendipity is, in my book, a moment that cannot be contrived. Most people simply aren’t going to talk to one-another unless there is some compelling reason, like, “Wow Zach, that fedora really goes with those crocs.” 

At some point we just walk past a coworker, exchange ‘hi’s’ and head to the kitchen or kegerator.

I think the bottom line of what Mr. Hsieh is saying is – if you put people in close proximity to one-another, they will interact. Yep, I get that. And rebuilding our city core can create an awesome environment for serendipity. He wows me with what he has taken on.

I give him props for working to build another Austin or Portland, because I love them both - great creative cities. Heck, I grew up in Portland and I get it.

But please, unlock the doors and let me concentrate – because serendipity has occupied all the ‘quiet’ rooms.