New country, same old story

I have spent the last week in Qatar. One of the few GCC countries I hadn't visited. Lovely people and a really nice vibe about the place (I recommend staying in the W Doha. www.whoteldoha.com/).

However the one thing that surprised me more than ever, is hearing the stories about the development of the country. You cannot knock the vision of the Sheikh Abdullah bin Qassim Al Thani, but the pathway to a post hydrocarbon economy sounds very familiar.

I'm found of the region, I like the idiosyncrasies and the preservation of culture and religion, in the face of many western influences, but I just don't get how they are going to fill these huge new cities up. After all Qatar, Bahrain, Dubai and Abu Dhabi have essentially the same development pathways. A little more tourism here, maybe a spaceport there but essentially they are the same. Which makes it all the more strange when you here peoples reaction to Dubai.

The only way I can see the figures working is to create indigenous businesses that develop the new services and light manufacturing companies of the future. Of course sovereign wealth funds have been busy shoring up European businesses but this is pure investment. It doesn't create jobs or new businesses to fill the number of villas and apartments that will be available in the region in the next 5-10 years.

Maybe I can't see the vision but I do know that to be successful these powerful economies need to be focused on growing a more substantive reason to stay than tourism.

The crowd sourcing debate goes on...

I've heard further bleating from the design industry on crowd sourcing.

As I have mentioned before in one of the discussions the way the industry works needs to change and that the current widely accepted business model is flawed. Crowd sourcing maybe just be the catalyst that changes the status quo.

The question now becomes how do you get remunerated for the value created not the cost of the input here is were it gets challenging. The models of performance never seem to work based on their being to many variables. Perhaps a new quantitative indicator is needed. Would favorability work measured through a variety of means (blogosphere, tweets, mentions, lines of copy). It's been an old ad metric so why not - surely standout is what it is all about anyway? This would align well to the tribal theory of brand management, where control is handed to the faithful.

A more radical way of looking at it would be to say that IP has no true value in what is becoming a rapidly open source society where competitive advantage through design exists for months rather than years (please nobody quote me Apple on this - heard it all before and try a different reference - it's good for the soul). Maybe the value is not created through design at all, maybe value is only generated at the point of interaction / engagement and therefore, coming full circle, crowd sourcing is part of that value generation.

I wonder if T-mobile / Orange with their naturally networked and savvy audience will be brave enough to go down the crowd source route. If so this could be the tipping point.

Motivation can be the hardest thing

Two years ago or so myself and a good friend came up with an idea to change the market for golf clothing. The genius of that moment was to spot a gap in the market for an urban range of golf attire that was more Quiksilver than Pringle.

18 months later www.lateralhazard.co.uk exists and has traded for well over a year. Has it taken off? Well I'm writing this from desk in the office so I guess not. In the interim we have sold plenty of T-shirts, made a number of amateur mistakes (we got a little carried away by the potential of an order), have sponsored a tour, then the tour went bust, lost one of the original partners, all things that any new business would expect.

However both myself and my business partner are now suffering from what can only be described as a lack of motivation towards the business. It's never easy holding a job and then a business + all the rigors of a young family, but what was fun and motivating has now become a drag.

I'm actively demonstrating to myself how in my professional life I would be urging those paying for my consultancy services to actively motivate people during these tough times. Working like this is actually a revelation because I can see directly how those tactics actually work. To a consultant this is like gold dust, actually experiencing the tactics you create.

I've found the most successful ways to motivate are those that provide perspective

• being patient - things don't change overnight
• look at what has been achieved to date and focus on the positives
• understand the mistakes but don't beat yourself up about them - you'll make them, accept it and learn from them
• going back to the business and brand story, change, tweak and if its wrong don't be afraid to start again
• speaking to customers - how enthusiastic are they about the product, what are there suggestions and how can the business perform better
• look at the new product development opportunities for next season
• focus on the reasons you started / joined

Let's see whether this works and how it effects the performance of Lateral Hazard.

Free pitching : come on get over yourselves

Well the GLA certainly stirred up a hornets nest the other week. The readers of that erstwhile industry magazine were salivating at the injustice of it all. I just can't understand why.

Free pitching can be looked on in a number of different ways. To the client it is effective a try before you buy mechanism, much better than creds as it is actually relevant and it doesn't cost a penny. Market forces also dictate that there are more agencies likely to indulge in free creative when times are tougher. To an agency it is a sacrifice of IP, is a loss of time that could be spent on other things and often ends up a beauty contest.

Many companies who build their business model on an IP basis are having problems with remuneration. Take the record industry, book publishing, film industry, TV, newspaper publishing, product design, etc. all of which have had consciously or not had to create and then give away IP for free. In some cases to the tune of many billions. They are all now seeking new commercial models that use the technologies that destroyed there old business models. I'm sure for one that Spotify will ride to the rescue of the record industry and give unsigned bands a new outlet.

To all in the industry I think this is a wake up call. Free pitching is here to stay, crowdsourcing will increase and unless we look at new more innovative business models that accept this then our industry will become an anacronysm alongside those that fail to adapt.

Why government communications don't work

I was asked the other day, how counter intuitive should a government agency be in trying to relate to a confused, hostile or indifferent public?

So what was my view?

Personally government should always seek to establish a relevant relationship with citizens, which is focused away from ‘big government’, the nanny state and popular perceptions of having to achieve ‘quota’s’ to govern ‘politically correct’ policy. When government is seen in this light it does little to motivate citizens or small and medium sized enterprises, all ready struggling with the issues of a shrinking economy.

This requires government agencies to focus on compelling reasons why a change in, or reinforcement of, citizen behaviour is needed. This means developing real insight to insure that the messages delivered are relevant and compelling enough to instigate the change. It must be remembered that the majority of transactions citizens have are with commercial organizations that entirely rely on using insight in this way to create intuitive connections to audiences. You are not told to buy a plasma TV nor a new set of trainers. You are motivated, even compelled to buy through active communication of the benefits (a better picture, fewer injuries, etc.). Citizens are therefore, conditioned to be influenced in this way.

This sounds easy and like all things in life about applying common sense, but it isn’t. Government agencies usually have a knack of undermining compelling thinking by seeking to be inclusive of everyone. This weakens communication, falling back into the cycle of perceived political correctness, big government, etc. You simply become all things to all people achieving little and reinforcing existing prejudice.

This helps no-one.