The Stractivist Manifesto

You write pages of ‘stuff’ that comes to your head while thinking of a campaign. Your head feels heavy and you need to take a walk. During the walk, you plan to make sense of everything you’ve written down. Maybe you will also talk to a few people, observe how they buy / behave (like a stalker, yes.).

Before you’ve taken a few steps outside, you start getting calls from colleagues asking for your whereabouts. “Management does not like it when you spend a long time out of office”, was one of the comments I’ve received.

During my short (and disastrous) stint at Dentsu, everyone, including the strategy department was expected to work a 9–5. Any form of walking around, talking to ‘real’ people was actually discouraged. No one wants to take an ‘extra step’ when it can land them in trouble.

Activists, stand on the other extreme of the spectrum. A lot of ‘activists’ don’t engage in a whole lot of doing these days, but ideally, they are those who believe in their cause and campaign for change.

In this sense, strategists (and planners) stand to learn a lot from activism. The idea to write this article came when I stumbled upon a book titled The Activist Manifesto by Rupert Younger. The book is in 4 parts. Part 01 is titled ‘Haves and Have-nots’. Part 2, ‘Have nots and activists’. Part 3 — ‘Socialist vs. Activist in Practice’ and Part 04 — ‘Position of the Activists in Relation to the various existing opposition parties’.

I have to disclaim that my knowledge about politics and the nuances of activism is next to nothing. But, skimming through the contents of the book, I could draw parallels to the world of strategists working in marketing and public policy. And as a title, ‘The Stractivist Manifesto’ is a lot cooler than ‘Things they don’t teach you at Miami Ad School’.

So without further ado, let me present to you, the stractivist manifesto.

Part 01: Ad Folk (Haves) and Normal People (Have-nots)

What do ad folk have that normal people don’t have? Their membership in the almost-incestuous marketing and advertising fraternity.

I think the ad scene anywhere in the world is like on the chart above.

“We are not the people we sell to.” This should be the mantra that every graduate that is birthed into the industry mumbles even in their sleep. But it is not, because we can’t empathize with what we are not aware of.

Enter research, the redeemer of marketers, silencer of the creative egos, it is easier to lift Thor’s hammer than to question research. Most ad execs and CMOs are convinced that research speaks on behalf of the people.

So much emphasis is put on the research that the importance placed on correctly interpreting research findings is ignored. Most decisions, including purchasing decisions, are made subconsciously. Answers to research questions are given consciously. Post rationalized answers come with a hefty serving of ego and status quo. The researcher who does not understand this, is the biggest threat to the advertising process.

Part 02: Strategy people and Normal People

In Jon Steele’s subliminal text ‘Truth, Lies and Advertising’, he explains how adoption of a new discipline called ‘Account Planning’ helped the US ad industry’s image problem in the early 80s (Steele’s records of how the industry in the US had a bad reputation prior to the advent of this new discipline from the UK makes for quite the interesting read).

From Stephen King to Politt and Bernbach to the modern-day greats, planners represent the normal people in boardrooms filled with people who are not normal (refer part 01).

While we (planners) got off to a great start, over the years, most planners lost their way and stopped representing normal people. This is because planners picked the lazy way to plan. Lazy planning does not involve walking around, observing people, eavesdropping, getting off your seat and see what is happening outside your office. Lazy planning is safe if it is backed by lazy research. Lazy planning costs more than no planning.

Good planning involves finding ways that will allow you to empathize with the customer. It involves dissecting research to find the truth. It involves going head-to-head with the company executives, bear the shrill mourns of your internal voice until clients, creatives, account managers finish explaining their point-of-view so that you can explain how normal people do different. Good planning is hard work. Good planning is sacrifice.

Part 03: Researcher vs. Strategist in practice

This part should be obvious. Unfortunately, it is not, at least in these parts of the world. Especially if you are a junior strategist or a non-strategy person, I urge you to stop thinking that longer is better, when it comes to strategy decks (a discourse on advertising is not the place for sexual innuendos. but neither is a false correlation between the number of slides on a PowerPoint presentation and quality of strategy it contains).

Strategists and Researchers have much in common (i.e., neither group has many friends outside of work). Most strategists do their own desk research and stalking. This preliminary information perhaps will inform the researcher when they are devising mechanisms to gather relevant information, interpreting the information, and presenting the information.

Figuring out what’s important to the business case, digging for insights that will eventually lead to forming an opinion will be handled by the planner/strategist (I use the two interchangeably). However, a good partnership between the researcher and strategist is crucial for successful campaigns.

Often, 100 pages worth of research information, can be condensed into 5 pages relevant to the case the agency will make to the client. If your success is based on the number of slides, this can be counterproductive to you and the client.

Part 04: Who is the strategist’s opponent?

Most of the time, it is the strategist himself. Imposter syndrome, being too focused on the statistics to the point where creativity is considered optional, not setting expectations for yourself when the management hasn’t set them out for you, playing safe.

Management that does not understand the role of strategy is also at the top of this list of commonly faced opponents. Processes that are too rigid, senseless KPIs, the list goes on.

These are common to most strategists and planners that I have interacted with. The first step towards defeating these forces of evil is to be aware that these exist. Setting intentions and then acting on them leads to self-improvement 10/10 times.

You are here because you have the skill for understanding problems and finding creative solutions for them. Use it bravely.

To conclude;

1. Haves and have-nots will not have the same attitudes or behaviour until the Haves decide to recruit from a variety of backgrounds. To think Haves and Have-nots think, do (buy) the same, is the cardinal sin.
2. Research informs of fuck-all, if it is not interpreted right.
3. No planning is better than lazy planning. Good planning is sacrifice. Some might dislike sacrificing anything other than their self-esteem to become a rung in the corporate ladder. Good planners sacrifice comfort because they can’t sleep well if they don’t find out ‘why’.
4. Your job as a strategist is not to replace a researcher. Work alongside the researcher. It is the combination of the skills that can unearth real insights
5. Most of the time, you’re standing in the way of being a better strategist.
6. If your growth is slowed down by a shitty workplace, quit.

Written by Kavinda Welagedara, Chief Strategy Officer at FUDGE