← Let's talk branding
Let's talk branding
Is the Sloppening upon us? The rise of Gen-AI and what it means for brands.
00:57:36
Loading summary
Transcript33 lines
- [00:00]
Joe Burns
You know, if you want to imagine a vision of the future, just imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.
- [00:08]
Unknown Host
Is this sloppening really happening? Today I'm chatting with Joe Burns about the rise of generative AI and what it means for us brand builders. Buckle up and let's talk branding.
- [00:23]
Joe Burns
The slopping. Yeah, I'm Joe, I'm a strategist. I work at creative agency called Quality Meets Creative. We're an independent agency. And yeah, so my output, the Flipbooks, I think I started, started doing it a year ago now and they've become really popular. I think it started, it started with a few different things kind of all coming together and they've just kind of naturally fallen into this rhythm of me posting up these things. I think a big one was I like making things, so it gave me something that I could make. I think another thing was this idea that strategy is so bad for not taking its own medicine. You know, we'll present a 150 slide presentation full of charts that's trying to tell clients that they need to be single minded and clear and emotional. And it's just like, well, why aren't you doing that then? Is that kind of how I respond to that stuff? So like it was applying the principles of what strategy says that you should do to strategy. So that was a big part of it. And then I think the last reason I started doing them was because I've just got very little faith in the existing institutions and structures of power that exist to navigate through the future. You get what I mean? Basically, I think, well, and I mean that in. And I was just like, oh, I just want to get some ideas out there and get thinking out there and maybe be a little bit disruptive, maybe put out some thinking that I think is needed out in the world. I think the thing for me is like, I think we've been living through a, up until maybe 2008, a period of history where the, the most important qualities for a system and the people controlling that system are no longer as relevant as they were. And like a lot of the crises and collapses that we're seeing in society, I point the finger at the systems of power and the people at the top of those systems of power and their inability to navigate the world as it is now, you know what I mean? And like, I think that's a big driver for me is like, well, I'm just a guy making silly books on LinkedIn, but maybe, maybe those things can have an effect and I can connect with other people. And we can maybe build stuff together or they can change people's minds and make them think in a new way. So like, it's a little bit iconoclastic, I'll admit, but yeah, each one is designed to be a engaging, nicely wrapped up, well packaged kind of strategic output. You know, just like delivering an idea in a way that people want to engage with and is interesting to them, you know, so that, that they're the ingredients that went into this and like, I've just been learning as I go. Really?
- [03:34]
Unknown Host
Yeah, I mean, they're fascinating and like for the people listening, you can't really see. But go have a Look at Joe's LinkedIn page and of course they'll be in the show notes. But like, what's interesting to me as well, that each of them is a bit like their own little visual universe and I'm guessing like to create them. Generative AI has been probably one of those things that helped you do this in a way that maybe wasn't possible maybe five years or ten years ago. But can you share just a little bit of the behind the scenes of how you make them? I think some people might be very curious.
- [04:10]
Joe Burns
Sure. I mean, I think it's a reflection of how I think and do stuff. So like some people, and I'm not this at all and. But I think there's an assumption, there's an assumption baked into the way that like work happens, which is that people think in a very linear way. And it's like I make a structure and then I plot out the beats in the structure and then I go and do this and it's like a kind of waterfall process, an individual level. And my brain just doesn't work like that at all. Like I can't. I really struggle to think in that linear way. And usually what happens is that linear storytelling component comes right at the end for me. So like, I usually just start out like with a vibe and a song in my head and like a visual idea of what I'm think, feeling, thinking about what's inside of me is very abstract. And then like I just start to play around with generate of AI or typography and design. And I use design, typography or music and visual stuff as a way of working out like what that abstract sensation is inside of me. And then eventually that probably forms into, like into a statement or an idea or something that's a little bit more crystallized and easy to communicate. So like that's how I think for everything, whether I'm doing messaging matrix for A brand or whatever. Like, I always try and start in the most kind of abstract and primordial almost place. So Generative AI has been amazing for me because I can kind of like, concoct a world that doesn't necessarily make much sense yet and then like, explore around it. And like, you know, I did one. One of the flip books I did was on the entropy economy. And like, that is a big part of that was this. This hypothetical card game between Machiavelli and Isaac Newton. And like, it's before AI. You could kind of. It take a long time to kind of like, work that out. You probably have to read a load of textbooks and stuff. And with Geni, I could just like, plug into Chat GPT. I was like, write me a fictional hypothetical card game and then that just becomes a piece of stem, and then you can start playing around with. Mid Journey is what I use. And just like, playing around, trying to get the imagery right. And it's. To me, GEN has been amazing because it allows me to work in a way that's much closer to how I'm naturally inclined to work rather than try and work in a very structured linear way. And I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with working in a structured linear way, but it tends to take you to places that are kind of expected and our jobs are about the unexpected and that never been done before. Rather than, like. I just think that process of, like, thinking through things in a very linear way is best left until the end when you've done the exploration job of thinking more abstractly.
- [07:25]
Unknown Host
Yeah, I love that. It reminds me a bit of this concept of, like, emergent strategy versus deliberate strategy. And a lot of what you're saying is like, kind of let it happen and things will come to you and let the things take shape as you go. And I think, indeed, like, a lot of times we pitch this glorified idea of going in your process and it's all very nicely structured. Maybe like, let's dive into the one that got me personally, like, the first flip book that I was like, really? Like, okay, this is something. This guy is like, thinking in a different way in an interesting way. And that was the sloppening. Like, what is the sloppening? Like, what? Tell us a bit about that.
- [08:06]
Joe Burns
Well, that's something I'd been. It's funny you should say that, because that's something I started working on nine months before I actually did the one that I posted. And the original, it was always called the sloppening So I thought that's just a great name for what's going on. But. And this is, to your point about emergent strategy, I was just thinking about, there's that quote in 1984 by George Orwell. And it's, you know, if you want to imagine a vision of the future, just imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever. And like, I was thinking about that, and the reason I was thinking about that was because of, you know, you get those weird ads for, like, mobile phone games where it'll be like a king tied up and then pulling. And they're just these weird, crazy. I'm not. How are these things being made? And then I kind of, in my head, I came up with this little ditty of just like, if you want to imagine a vision of the future, imagine a thumb tapping on a mobile game ad forever. Do you know what I mean? And, like, that was the start of that thing. And I was like, but what's going on there? Why is this image and this line emerging in my mind? And I think it's just like this idea of a dystopia where we just overrun with slop and slop, to me. And I wanted to define what slop is because everyone can. Slop's a bit like that famous quote about the US lawyer or whatever, where the US court judge who's like, I don't know what pornography is, but I know it when I see it. You know what I mean? And, like, I think we were in that state of being when it comes to what is slop. And I wanted to define slop in a way that was useful to us so we could spot it and avoid it. And I think I landed on which, to me, I think is the right definition of what slop is. It's content that's produced only to move a metric rather than to have an objective that that metric's designed to measure. So it's like anything that's content that's produced and put out in the world that doesn't serve an objective. It's just designed to increase a metric. Clicks, like, shares, whatever. There's no deeper purpose to it. And I think with that definition combined with what you can easily do with AI, you can really see how if we set out to move metrics, and I don't know if you saw the thing recently, but Mark Zuckerberg said, like, oh, clients, you know, marketers will be able to plug into Facebook their objective and then we'll do the rest and their budget, you know, and like, this Stuff's getting worse, man, because like, in the slopping in, I'm talking about, well, actually if you just set out to increase a metric, then you'll just produce slop to increase that metric, you know, rather than anything that actually affects the objective that sits behind it. And then this Zuckerberg quote comes out where he's saying that. And I just think like, that's some. That to me tells me everything I need to know about like, where we're at as a industry. Because I'm sure, I'm pretty sure that what he's talking about there isn't objectives, it's metrics. And like, if we're at the point as an industry where people who control these giant platforms and a large proportion of the people working in that industry don't understand the difference between an objective and a metric, we are screwed. Do you know what I mean? Because like, that is basic stuff that you should learn in school before you even start working. And you've got people who are on maybe seven figure salaries not understanding this stuff. It's insane. It's shocking. And like that to me is, that's what the danger is. I think it'll come out in the wash over the long, longer view of things because like that way of operating just is. It will get out maneuvered by people who do have the understanding to do stuff. But like that to me is like, that's what the slopping is all about. It's like confusing metrics and objectives and optimizing on the metrics and not even thinking about the objectives and then like all of the trends that you see. And like I said the Zuckerberg quote about plug in your objective and budget and then we'll do the rest. To me that like really loudly says that the sloppening is, is upon us.
- [12:38]
Unknown Host
Yeah, I mean, I love that and I think it's, it's like a big part indeed of like, what, what I'm starting to see also with like a lot of the content and the imagery that is now being produced. Like, you can obviously see people using like very basic chat imagery and it all looks the same and it almost feel like, it feels like this just, you know, more sea of sameness with different tools. And that's interesting to me because on the one hand there's people like you that are able to use this technology to create visually distinct and pleasing content that really stands out. And on the other hand it's bringing a sea like a wave of crap towards us, I guess. And like, I'M wondering how you feel about that part. Like, is, is it really about the AI that is making things so bland or is it just us humans using it in the wrong way? And, and maybe what is the right way to use them is this is.
- [13:38]
Joe Burns
Really, I think this is just like a change that we're seeing and it's good and it's bad. I don't think it's the. I'm actually been working, as you can imagine. I've probably got a dozen ideas for things that are just sitting there waiting to be made. I don't have time to just knock them out daily. But like, one of them is this. It's like the most powerful, the biggest, the most powerful thing about AI and the worst thing about AI is the same thing and it's the AI never ever says, are you sure about that? You know, because like back to the. What I was kind of saying at the start about like institutional power and the systems that are in place at the minute, they did a really good job of gatekeeping stuff. In fact, they did such a good job of gatekeeping stuff that it kept out a lot of bad stuff and probably got rid of a lot of potentially good stuff as well. Right? Because good ideas, the best, let's say the best ideas, the top 5% of ideas, when someone first has those ideas or those ideas first emerge from a group of people, most people think it's just crazy, weird, stupid. Do you know what I mean? Like, most people are going to be like. Because they're not they that can't have the imagination and can't see where that idea is going to go and what the real potency of it. If it was obvious, if that idea was obvious, someone would have had it all already, you know. Yeah, an AI is going to completely get rid of that gatekeeping. So like, what we'll probably see is that top 2% of brilliant ideas that were just too good to be sold through the structures that used to exist. It was too advanced for people to kind of give a green light to. They'll probably find a way to get made now because people will have AI to make them. At the same time, the 20% bottom of ideas that are terrible are also going to get made because AI doesn't say, are you sure about that? So I think it's just going to change the dynamics of ideas and what gets made. And I think we're going to adapt the way we engage with content and probably become a little bit more discerning about what we engage with as a result of it, but it's going to happen. So it's a bit of an is ought distinction thing. I think it's like, is it a good thing or is it a bad thing? I think that's kind of a difficult question to answer, but it's definitely going to happen, so be prepared.
- [16:18]
Unknown Host
Yeah, and that's where like for me it's interesting. I just put out this documentary film on mascots and like let's say 70, 80% of the people were just like, hey, it's a great video and really fun, I enjoyed it. But there was some like generative AI stuff in there, you know, some B rolls I generated and some fun stuff. And like a good 30% of the comments was like actually funny. Like AI slop and AI sloppily. And like this is terrible and how can you do this as an art? And like, like you're running, you know, the whole, there's, there's a whole hate around this and I'm, I'm like, I'm really wondering, like, I don't know if you have a take on it but like first off, like how big is this group of people? We think. And also secondly, like, how do you deal with it as a creative? Like, because sometimes I do feel like, hey, maybe I am on the wrong side of this and maybe I shouldn't be using this stuff. And like, yeah, just curious about your take on that.
- [17:18]
Joe Burns
Yeah, it is a difficult thing because, and I think this is the way I see it is ultimately all it does is it just reduces the barrier to including things into something you're going to make. And like, I find it really strange that so much of the discussion and conversation about AI is going like, hey, they'll be able to make films for less money and faster. And I'm like, that just seems like a wit. Films are good. Why would you change that? But what it does mean is instead of just making a short text based thing, you can make it more engaging and visual. So it's like to me, the great thing about AI is it opens up a massive long tail of spaces and places for different types of ideas where previously you couldn't put an idea in there. You know what I mean? Like that I think is where it's cool. Like, you know, I post these flip books on LinkedIn and the lifespan of these is 48 hours. So like you'd never spend three months going out and shooting photographs for something that people look at for 30 seconds and then the lifespan of it from a content point of view is only 48 hours. That's insane. So like, so to me, that's my, I think my argument is that it's like, yeah, I could make a film documentary about that, but I've got a full time job and I don't really think this idea is worth a full documentary. Maybe I'll collect a few of them and make a book at some point. And like that won't be visual, that'll be text based or whatever. And it's just to me, the beauty of AI is it opens up new spaces and places to put ideas that are more engaging. Not that it, you know, can make cheaper, slightly crappier versions of things that we already invest time and effort in. And I think to your question about like that 20 to 30% of people who are like, oh, AI slop, AI slop. It's like, I think they're just judging and they've got the wrong judgment criteria. Like they're judging your documentary film. Like it's a, like a HBO documentary, you know what I mean? Where it's like, yeah. And the response then is like, if HBO or the BBC or whatever want to come and give me a million million dollars to make this into a documentary, I won't use AI. They don't. So I'm just going to make it with a. Do you get what I mean?
- [19:53]
Unknown Host
It's like, I promise, yeah, oh yeah.
- [19:57]
Joe Burns
Sure, I'll make it. And we can get the rights for all the footage and we can do it that way. But HBO haven't called me up and offered me a million dollars yet. So I'll just do it for $10 on ChatGPT. You get what I mean?
- [20:08]
Unknown Host
It's like, yeah, 100%. Yeah. I think it's interesting like what you see a lot now. Like, I mean, I've been working in house at a company where it's like, we're also thinking a lot about, you know, how can we use AI in marketing and in the whole company basically to be more efficient but also to be more creative, to do more stuff. And then you see a lot of platforms that are like, hey, you just going to be able to produce ads in no time. And obviously I'm guessing your take is like that that's not per se, a good thing there. But I'm wondering, just in today's space, what does it take to make a good ad?
- [20:49]
Joe Burns
Oh God, that's a great question. That's a really good question because so much of the time when, and a lot of the stuff I post and comment on and create. It's actually not directly advertised. It might indirectly took it. I honestly think like the ingredients for a good ad are the same as they've ever been and also similar to what it takes to make good content, which is like, it's the two P's. Let's call it. It's personality and perspective. You know, like that's, that's ultimately all it comes down to. It's like have a perspective on a thing and then deliver that perspective with a personality that's unique and different and like that's all there really is to it. Like, if you want to talk about what it takes to have effective advertising, which is a slightly different question, I think it's having a. It's applying that personality and perspective to a really interesting problem. You know, there you go. We've already got the four Ps of marketing, but like I've got three Ps of what makes a good effective ad, which is like finding a really interesting and smart problem to solve and then solving it with a degree of. With a new perspective on what you can do to solve it and with the right kind of personality that people. People find compelling. So like the, the media channels are shifting, the problems that you're solving are shifting, but the. Those that kind of personality element still crucial. And like I was chatting to someone the other day and to me, the best creative idea in the communications world of the last decade is Spotify wraps. I just think it's brilliant, you know, because it's still got everything that a great ad has in terms of. It's delivered with personality. The brand's got a nice tone and a sense of humor. It's got a sense of perspective, which is almost like your, the music you listen to tells you a lot and is almost a soundtrack to what's gone on in your year. But I think the, the real clever thing about it is it's a creative idea that's designed for a world of systems rather than a, a world of linear stories in mass media. And like, you know, just to kind of play back a little bit of what you were doing when you were saying, setting context to the question of saying like working within agencies and like the challenges that agencies have and wanting to be more efficient agencies. The problem isn't that they're inefficient and they are inefficient. It's true. The problem is. And this is the problem that's. That plagues agencies. And it. The, the real, the real issue is that in order to do twice as Much stuff. Agencies need to work twice as hard. And that to me is not a business model. Do you get what I mean? If I had to work twice as hard to do twice as much stuff, I just got a treadmill, I've got a problem on my hands. If I work for one hour and I can produce 10 widgets, if I can only produce 20 widgets in two hours, I don't consider that a business model. It doesn't work out in my head if I can produce 100 with it. If I can, like, if every 100% increase in time and effort spent results in like a thousand percent increase in output, then you've got a business, you know. And like agencies just like they've not solved that problem. So their only solution is either work harder or reduce the costs. And like, I think what we'll probably see within the next two to five years is agencies really understanding that if they don't solve that problem, they're screwed. And like we'll see agencies starting investing more into and AI is going to make it really easy for them to do that. I think it's just. But agencies have always been really hesitant to apply creativity to the way they operate. Which is the big irony about agencies. It's like, yeah, we're the most creative people in the world except for anything to do with how we do things, which is like a cottage industry from the 60s still. So like, I think AI is just going to force the change there because it's so there's, there's so much capability to do that scaling job and there's so much capability of it to kind of make the processes more efficient that I think will, it will force evolution.
- [25:24]
Unknown Host
Yeah, yeah. And I think what's going to be interesting to see is like how the role evolves a bit of like I see a lot of companies pushing to be more like in house autonomously. Like now you have some tools that allow you to, you know, do a lot of stuff in house. But like the one thing that a lot of companies don't have in house is that creativity that maybe some agencies bring to the table. And that's where like for me it's interesting and I'd be curious for both perspectives. Like if you are an in house marketer, like what would be your advice on how to tackle this and you know, help the brand stand out and be creative. And on the other hand also of course your take on like whether it's a good idea to go full in house and that sort of stuff, we.
- [26:12]
Joe Burns
Actually work quality Meets actually work with a lot of clients with in house teams. We're in a way set up to that. You know, I think if you think about, you think about old school big ad agencies with like 300 plus people in them, like they're really, really good for clients with like a regular cadence of pretty formulaic stuff that's going out the door, you know what I mean? Like that scale of the agency, I'm talking more creative here rather than like the holding company that holds it. But like a big chunky 300 plus person agency is fantastic. If you're the kind of brand who knows they're going to have four campaigns a year, there's always going to be a 30 second TV spot and 600 different banners for that thing and like that's gonna happen and you just want to hand that over to a specialist group of people. That big chunky agency that can then matrix into your business and just like churn that stuff out. But I don't think that big agency was ever good at servicing smaller, smaller clients with more unusual and different problems. And those smaller clients tend to have, you know, either. No, no, they have a very small startupy type things or scale up type things or their, they maybe have their own in house teams who handle the banners and things like that. And actually like we found that we work really well with those kind of clients as a kind of plugin because there's so little intermediation. You know, like thinking about that big old school agency, they always used to make it look like a ladder. So it'd be like you'd have the CMO who talked to the cco, you'd have the. Do you know what I mean? And then like you'd have a layer of account management that formed a ladder shape across with every layer within the client's organization. Right. And we don't have that at all. You know, at quality meets. We're not some kind of ladder structure. It's called top to top and it's basically just the clients who've got the problem speak to the people who are solving the problem. It's that simple. And like what that means is if there are internal creative teams they can then plug in and be part of the process as well. So it allows us to work with clients with in house teams. And like we worked, we did the GoDaddy Super bowl campaign this year and that they've got a big in house team who produce a lot of marketing assets. So yeah, I think that it depends on what kind of client you are and what kind of problem you're facing and like how much you want to hand that over to an external partner and what kind of partner it is. I know that's a bit of like, how long is a piece of string answer. But like, as an organization, we like working with in house teams. And I think the flip side of that is as well, we're very entrepreneurial as an agency. And I think this is another thing that AI and all the other changes that are happening right now, it massively increases the value of entrepreneurialism. Right. And like, you know, this is an extremely, an extremely reductive piece of thought that I'm going to say now. So apologies, but like, I think you can broadly divide people's skills into three buckets. And like everyone has a different selection of skills. But like bucket number one is following instructions. Are you really good at diligent at following instructions? AI is better than any human being ever at that. So like that skill set becomes completely. It's like if all you can do is follow instructions, then AI is not looking good. The second, I think big skill bucket is like knowledge arbitrage. So knowing things and then giving those things that you know to people. Now like, I think what's going to be really interesting with AI is open knowledge. If the things you know about a public domain, then yeah, again, your skills have just been commoditized completely. If your knowledge is in a closed domain, then actually you become, you know, relatively speaking, far more valuable. So like, if you're in closed groups of people who talk and come up with new ideas, which is kind of what an ad agency is really, ultimately, then that becomes extremely valuable as long as those ideas don't become part of the open, open network. And then the third skill set I think is just being able to make things. And they could be software things, or they could be like knowledge things, or they could be physical things. And I think being able to make things, actually you become way more powerful because of AI. So to me they're the three kind of buckets of skill. And like AI changes the balance of those things completely. So I think agencies are going to have to adjust. Clients are going to have to adjust. There's a question of like, what do we want the agency for? And to me, because of those shifts, it's like if you want your agency to just like, you tell them something and they go and make it, that's probably just like no longer a kind of viable positioning from an agency. If that agency is selling a unique perspective and knowledge that only exists in that closed environment, that becomes more valuable. And if the agency is full of entrepreneurial people who like to make things and do things, that becomes more valuable too. So I think that relationship between client and agency is going to become much less transactional because AI is going to do all the transactional. Go make this thing, don't think stuff. So like it's an interesting time.
- [32:18]
Unknown Host
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I like the fact that like you put people in that third bucket of like makers, people that love to tinker and do stuff in a bucket that's like not easily replaced because a lot of times we tend to think that, you know, well, you're a 3D designer, you're done, you're an illustrator, you're done. Well actually I believe that, you know, if these people keep on creating stuff in a non obedient way, then definitely there's a lot of value in what they do. I'm maybe just to like, I think it could be an interesting bridge to one of your other flip books where I think it's called Kiss My Asset. And just to jump to the last point where you said like, it's not just about deciding like how much to make, but it's more about deciding what to make and the role of strategy within that. And I'd love you for you to unpack that a little bit because I think it's an important part of this.
- [33:12]
Joe Burns
Yeah. And I mean this is just something that I've noticed. If you're strategist in a creative agency, you work with a lot of creatives. And to me the most frustrating question a creative can ask is just like, what are the deliverables? Because what that tells me is like as soon as a creative asks that question, it kind of tells me that they're not really thinking about what they've got to do. They're thinking about like filling in the boxes and just shipping it. You know what I mean? It shows me that they're not really engaging with the meaningful part of what they're being asked to do, which is like, can you solve this problem in a way that's creative? You know, they're just thinking like, okay, if I just put a funny thing in this box, then job done, we can ship it out. And like, to me that it's a, it's not just frustrating as a strategist because you're like, hey guys, we've got to solve this is the problem that we're being paid to solve here. Like, let's engage with that and then we can work out the specific formats and deliverables and versions that we need to do. That's downstream of the ideas. And it's not just personally irritating, it's also like a highway to becoming a vendor that's going to be replaced by AI. The more we frame the job as filling out a media plan, the more we devalue the thing that is the human component of the job, which is working out how to solve the problem or working out the way of grabbing people's attention or whatever. So yeah, I think the, the other thing is, and, and I think this is going to be a brilliant thing that AI ushers in is if you look over the, even just over my career of like 15 to 20 odd years in advertising, if I look at the change in a marketing plan from then to now, it's insane how much more complicated is almost. But the, I think like the tools and systems and processes that are in place to, to, to help creative agencies deliver on those complicated marketing plans just aren't there. You know, And I, I always also, if I was being punchy, I've been a little bit spiky and punchy on this course, this podcast already, so why not, why stop there? But like I almost think as well that the systems thinking talent isn't in the industry enough. And like again, it's very broad brushstrokes. Like there's certain people I think think in a very linear way. They're great storytellers, those kind of people because like we experience time in a linear way usually unless you've been to an Ayahuasca ceremony recently, you're usually going through time in a very linear way. Tuesday comes after Mondays most from the time. Right. And as a result stories in our heads work in that way. But systems thinkers, they don't really experience things in that way. They think much more in a top down. It's much more Bandersnatch or like for the black mirror thing or like they think probabilistically and understand how systems connect to each other. And modern media plans and modern marketing plans, there are systems thinking operation, right? But the stuff that goes in them is the most highly linear thinking imaginable. It's stories. Whether that's a poster or a 5 second TikTok reel or a 30 second TV ad, they're linear stories usually like very rarely you'll have something that isn't Spotify wrapped being a great example of a systems based idea rather than a story based idea. And to me, what hopefully AI will allow us to do is plug in More of that systems thinking and systems design into marketing plans in smarter ways. Because it's still very unsophisticated how those two elements are brought together and not just in terms of the thinking and the strategic stuff that sits around that we still send. We transfer files, man. We transfer vials with friggin with PNGS.
- [37:23]
Unknown Host
In them that always expire when you need them.
- [37:27]
Joe Burns
You know what I mean? It's like all Dropbox link and it's just like, are we still in a process where to come up with a creative idea? People sit around in a Google Doc, show the Google Doc to the client, go back to the Google Doc, make some changes, show it to the client again. The client says, great. Then we turn those things into something you can test. You take that to an audience and test it. Then you go back to a Google Doc and change the thing again. Then you make a final version that you save on a cloud server, put in a Dropbox and send to the media agency. I am but a lowly strategist and I can see that that is a terrible, crappy, inefficient way of doing things.
- [38:12]
Unknown Host
Things.
- [38:13]
Joe Burns
You know what I mean? Like, yeah, there must be a better way to integrate those different components of creative ideation, research validation, client approvals, asset delivery, media. Like we could probably sit around for an afternoon and come up with a better system and if some venture capital firm then lent us $12 million, probably turn it into a thing. But you get what I mean? Like, yeah, my point is, it's like you look around at the systems that we have in place in the advertising and marketing industry and like, you know, anyone can see the problems that work twice as hard to make twice as hard much stuff that's a problem. There's no scaling. The inefficient system of like getting from brief to asset is just a huge inefficiency. And like, I think this is what I mean about when I was being Sparky. I'll be honest, at the start of the thing and I was saying I don't have much faith in the existing institutions and systems of power. I think they're just looking at things of like, oh, we can just replace the people component with AI. And like, genuinely, I think a lot of these people, they were just in their head, it's an AI making a Google Doc and then an AI saving things to a Dropbox. Just like, maybe we could build a better system that still retained human interaction. And maybe the problem is this really janky old linear process that's just like, woefully inefficient. Anyway, that's my soapboxy rant about things.
- [39:49]
Unknown Host
No, no, but it's so true. I see a lot of these diagrams where it's like, we're building an agency, and it's like all the people just got replaced by agents, and it's like, what are you doing? That's not really, I think, how it should be. But anyway, maybe one more thing. I think. I mean, this podcast, there is a lot of thinking about brands in a strategic way. And one of your other flipbooks was about keeping it stupid simple and how to be a great strategist. And I really love that because I think it connects well to everything you said about how to interact with these new tools and how to look at this brave new world, what we can call it. So, yeah, I think that would be a great way to wrap it up.
- [40:34]
Joe Burns
Yeah. I mean, I think everyone can benefit from strategic thinking, and I think every strategist can benefit from making things. Like, that's ultimately, to me, like, I hate opinion havers. And I realize I say that as a man who has a lot of opinions, but at least I turn them into something that I can throw out there. I just think, like, that idea that you can have this kind of patrician class of people who go around just having opinions on things. I find really, the thought leaders. The thought leaders, yeah. And I say that as someone who occasionally gets called that, but, like, I just don't think. I like to make things. I like. I think everyone who makes things should be helped to think strategically. So, like, that's what I was trying to do there is just kind of like, really capture the skills that make someone a good strategist. And what that's all about in a way that encouraged people to make stuff and also is really applicable if you're a copywriter or a graphic Designer or a 3D object builder or whatever it might be. It's like, I think those strategic skills, let's call them, they're really applicable to anyone because it's just like noticing things, making stuff up that doesn't exist already and then packaging it up in a way that's interesting and compelling to people. Like that, to me, is like the core sales set of strategy. And I think everyone can benefit from that. Yeah, some people can be a specialist strategist, and that's what they do. Like, you know, if you're starting up a B2B software as a service brand. Yeah. Get a strategist in and they can probably help you make a really good pitch deck. Do you know what I mean? Get a strategist in and they can probably help you define what your messaging architecture should be on social media, or maybe you're a big brand and you need to reach a new consumer that's a different audience to what you normally sell to. A strategist can probably help make some things that will help you do that better. But I actually think that strategy is one of those things that can be democratized and anyone could just be like, oh, yeah, I can notice things, I can make stuff up and I can put it in weird boxes. And I think the flip side of that is that strategists can package their stuff up and make it more transferable. As well. So, yeah, that's, that's what I was getting at with that. And I think those skills become more valuable again because of those trends with AI, it's like anyone can make anything pretty quickly now. Vibe coding is going to be huge. You know, like, this is going to. I don't think anyone realizes how. How big of a shift Vibe code and if it actually gets really good is going to make, you know, because like, I could have, I could be like, oh, my client needs a social listening app. And we, we could just Vibe code a social listening app, you know, and then it. And this. And it solves the problem of scalability for agencies as well. Because if you've got an agency team of people who can Vibe code a tool, you don't have to just give that to the client as a deliverable in a Dropbox file. You can be like, okay, pay US$100 a month for this tool. Now do you get what I mean?
- [43:43]
Unknown Host
Like, yeah.
- [43:44]
Joe Burns
And that changes the equation for agencies. So the strat. I think strategy is going to become more important because there's more tools to make stuff without having to execute it, you know, but that then therefore means that strategists need to become more executional, you know, if they want to survive.
- [44:03]
Unknown Host
If they do get your hands dirty.
- [44:04]
Joe Burns
Yeah. If you're a strategist and you do manage to crack execution, then you just become the most valuable person in the building because you can understand and notice where there's room for a new idea, define what that new idea can be, and then just make it because you straight off the bat. So if you can master that executional side of things, you become extremely valuable. And like, you're able to not just within creative agencies, but for, for clients as well. And, like, you can build it products for, you know, What? I mean, like, to me, that's like, oh, wow, strategy gets really, really cool now. Oh, all of a sudden, like, I can say to a client, oh, yeah, we should. Let's do this social media monitoring tool, for example. It's like, you can build them a social media monitoring tool that will surface any relevant comment from a user on Reddit or Twitter or whatever and immediately present the client with, like. And here's what the response should be based on a, you know, brand guidelines that we built and baked into the thing as well. It's like, is that taking a copywriter's job? No. What is that actually doing? It's taking the really frustrating, horrible bit of the corrupt copywriter's job and allowing them to focus on making a really cool brand guidelines that kind of define it. So, like, yeah, I think your role as a strategist becomes really exciting and cool thanks to all this stuff.
- [45:36]
Unknown Host
Yeah, I mean, there's so much more stuff we could dig into, but I guess we've had enough strategic cold cuts for today. I really enjoyed this conversation. Thanks for coming on the show, Joe.
- [45:48]
Joe Burns
Yeah, thank you for having me on. It's been a pleasure to chat. Like I said, hopefully I wasn't too sparky at the front and too iconoclastic, but, like, I think now is the time where there's just huge shifts happening and, like, all the playbooks and the ways of thinking of the past, some of them are going to have to be amended, you know, at the very least. So, yeah, it's an exciting time for people who don't like following rules, which I think I am. You know what I mean? Like, if you don't like just doing things how they've always been done and following the rules, now is the best time.
- [46:26]
Unknown Host
Well, amen. Disobedience for all of you. Thanks so much, Joe.
- [46:31]
Joe Burns
Thanks, man.