<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Great minds think alike.</title>
	<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:48:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Tom Monahan</title>
		<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-1013</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:29:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-1013</guid>
					<description>I love it when someone puts a fresh spin on an old idea.  But to put a fresh spin on a common misconception about fresh ideas, to make it ring true, well, that takes the cliché turnaround to a whole 'nother level.  Thanks, Idea Hunter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love it when someone puts a fresh spin on an old idea.  But to put a fresh spin on a common misconception about fresh ideas, to make it ring true, well, that takes the cliché turnaround to a whole &#8216;nother level.  Thanks, Idea Hunter.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: The Idea Hunter</title>
		<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-1010</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-1010</guid>
					<description>Not long ago, over here in England, the Economist magazine adapted the cliche for one of its adverts:

Great minds like a think!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not long ago, over here in England, the Economist magazine adapted the cliche for one of its adverts:</p>
<p>Great minds like a think!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Gary Bloomer</title>
		<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-984</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-984</guid>
					<description>Sometimes, when great minds think alike, the result is garbage.
The best example I can think of is that lame old chestnut we see wheeled out night after night on television spots for cough mixture, or pain killers, or some allergy cure-all.

And by best, do I really mean worst?

Yes, because it's an example of lots of people doing the same thing because they (probably) didn't attack the problem enough to weed out and dramatize the one brilliant benefit that sets their client's product apart in a sea of competition.

It's the &quot;I use Brand XYZ because ... (wait for it) ... NOTHING WORKS BETTER&quot; approach. Well, if NOTHING works better, why the hell is the person in the ad using Brand XYZ? The NWB idea is not an idea. It's an anti-idea. It makes a mockery of a sham of a joke of even attempting to set the brand you're working on apart from the rest of the products in that category.

Yes, it's a turn of phrase, (aka a cliche), but to see NWB rolled out so often in an industry that's so focused on breaking new ground, I'm stunned that so many creatives (I don't know, maybe it's the SAME creative team, over and over again) cannot come up with something ... ANYTHING ... more lively, or more original than
&quot;nothing works better&quot;.

People, it's tired. It's weary. It's been done to death. It's forgetable. If it were on a gurney in the ER, NWB would be flatlining it's little heart out. It's eyes mere Xs in the cartoon strip that is the world of advertising. Yet, like an aging, farting, senile thespian who cannot recall their lines and who smells oddly of linement and gin, it's rolled out time and time again when it ought to have been quietly carted off to The Dunactin' Retirement Home for Knackered Old Thesps decades ago.

Why? Because hey ... common minds think alike.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes, when great minds think alike, the result is garbage.<br />
The best example I can think of is that lame old chestnut we see wheeled out night after night on television spots for cough mixture, or pain killers, or some allergy cure-all.</p>
<p>And by best, do I really mean worst?</p>
<p>Yes, because it&#8217;s an example of lots of people doing the same thing because they (probably) didn&#8217;t attack the problem enough to weed out and dramatize the one brilliant benefit that sets their client&#8217;s product apart in a sea of competition.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the &#8220;I use Brand XYZ because &#8230; (wait for it) &#8230; NOTHING WORKS BETTER&#8221; approach. Well, if NOTHING works better, why the hell is the person in the ad using Brand XYZ? The NWB idea is not an idea. It&#8217;s an anti-idea. It makes a mockery of a sham of a joke of even attempting to set the brand you&#8217;re working on apart from the rest of the products in that category.</p>
<p>Yes, it&#8217;s a turn of phrase, (aka a cliche), but to see NWB rolled out so often in an industry that&#8217;s so focused on breaking new ground, I&#8217;m stunned that so many creatives (I don&#8217;t know, maybe it&#8217;s the SAME creative team, over and over again) cannot come up with something &#8230; ANYTHING &#8230; more lively, or more original than<br />
&#8220;nothing works better&#8221;.</p>
<p>People, it&#8217;s tired. It&#8217;s weary. It&#8217;s been done to death. It&#8217;s forgetable. If it were on a gurney in the ER, NWB would be flatlining it&#8217;s little heart out. It&#8217;s eyes mere Xs in the cartoon strip that is the world of advertising. Yet, like an aging, farting, senile thespian who cannot recall their lines and who smells oddly of linement and gin, it&#8217;s rolled out time and time again when it ought to have been quietly carted off to The Dunactin&#8217; Retirement Home for Knackered Old Thesps decades ago.</p>
<p>Why? Because hey &#8230; common minds think alike.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tom Monahan</title>
		<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-949</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2007 02:57:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-949</guid>
					<description>The article that HighJive recommends at http://www.aaup.org (American Association of University Professors) speaks to the value of the diversified perspective, from an education POV.  I quote in part: &quot;If higher education intends to continue to educate students for the world of work, it must also embrace the contributions different perspectives can bring.&quot; 

When compared to the values and contributions of higher education, my simple business context seems a little light weight.  Nonetheless, one of the pillars of the brainstorming process that our group espouses, which I failed to mention above, is the diversity of the team members.

When we break out our groups of 20 - 30 people into small teams of 4 - 6 individuals, we always try to diversify the mix by whatever means gives us a rich cross section of perspectives; veterans vs. newbies (to the company or the industry), diversity by discipline within the company, gender mix, age mix - I even often joke and say, &quot;I also want teams diversified by height, as I don't want people seeing eye to eye.&quot;  Ethic mix is also a diversity measure, but I must say it's a telling statement that this is almost impossible to do in most American companies.

When we work in Europe, the nationalistic and ethnic mix is always richer.  Yet in North America and in Asia, the groups are almost always so predominantly Caucasian and Asian respectively, that asking for such mix by team is almost futile.   I’m not sure I know what the answer is, except to acknowledge the message in article recommended above, that education is a prime place where the meaningful shifts will happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article that HighJive recommends at <a href='http://www.aaup.org' rel='nofollow'>http://www.aaup.org</a> (American Association of University Professors) speaks to the value of the diversified perspective, from an education POV.  I quote in part: &#8220;If higher education intends to continue to educate students for the world of work, it must also embrace the contributions different perspectives can bring.&#8221; </p>
<p>When compared to the values and contributions of higher education, my simple business context seems a little light weight.  Nonetheless, one of the pillars of the brainstorming process that our group espouses, which I failed to mention above, is the diversity of the team members.</p>
<p>When we break out our groups of 20 - 30 people into small teams of 4 - 6 individuals, we always try to diversify the mix by whatever means gives us a rich cross section of perspectives; veterans vs. newbies (to the company or the industry), diversity by discipline within the company, gender mix, age mix - I even often joke and say, &#8220;I also want teams diversified by height, as I don&#8217;t want people seeing eye to eye.&#8221;  Ethic mix is also a diversity measure, but I must say it&#8217;s a telling statement that this is almost impossible to do in most American companies.</p>
<p>When we work in Europe, the nationalistic and ethnic mix is always richer.  Yet in North America and in Asia, the groups are almost always so predominantly Caucasian and Asian respectively, that asking for such mix by team is almost futile.   I’m not sure I know what the answer is, except to acknowledge the message in article recommended above, that education is a prime place where the meaningful shifts will happen.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: HighJive</title>
		<link>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-940</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 16:17:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://before-after.com/blog3/2007/02/08/great-minds-think-alike/#comment-940</guid>
					<description>to semi-digress, people producing diversity ads have often used the headline, &quot;great minds don't think alike&quot; — ironically turning it into a cliche in the diversity-ad category.

here's an article inspired by such an ad:

&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2000/00so/SO00Turn.htm&quot;&gt;http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2000/00so/SO00Turn.htm&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>to semi-digress, people producing diversity ads have often used the headline, &#8220;great minds don&#8217;t think alike&#8221; — ironically turning it into a cliche in the diversity-ad category.</p>
<p>here&#8217;s an article inspired by such an ad:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2000/00so/SO00Turn.htm"target="_blank"  onclick="javascript:urchinTracker ('/outbound/comment/www.aaup.org');"><a href='http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2000/00so/SO00Turn.htm' rel='nofollow'>http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2000/00so/SO00Turn.htm</a></a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.469 seconds -->
