Comments for Before & After : Creative thinking in business

Comment on Some serious remodeling of in-house communications agencies. by Tom Monahan

Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:38:36 +0000

Highlights from The In-House Agency Forum meeting at Boston.tv.

Comment on Some serious remodeling of in-house communications agencies. by Tom Monahan

Fri, 18 May 2007 19:56:59 +0000

Tom, I’m sure some companies or entire industries didn’t swing with the overall pendulum, but there was a significant contraction in the ’90’s, even if I’m not sure I know all the reasons for it. Of course,even the current uptick isn’t across the board. What I’m pointing out here is that, with so much of the ever fragmenting pie chart up for grabs (or is it the long tail bar graph?) in-house is in a prime position to stake a new claim. However, the answer isn’t just going back to what was traditionally done in house. It’s embracing new media or better yet inventing it. Someone is going to do this for just about all marketers who want to play in all the new spaces. I’m seeing just enough evidence that in-house, who’s always been willing to get their hands dirty, is seizing the day, while many ad agency people, in spite of what they might be saying, are acting like nothing much is changing.

Comment on Some serious remodeling of in-house communications agencies. by Thomas R. Clifford

Fri, 18 May 2007 11:08:41 +0000

Can’t fool the pendulum…

I worked at The Travelers Insurance in Hartford from ‘84 - ‘94. We had a huge Corporate Communications in-house department…200+ or so; a dozen or more folks just in the TV Studio.

Then the early ’90’s hit…BOOM! Good times over.

I left in ‘94 with three people in Corporate Communications.

Now in-house departments are back.

The pendulum never stops, does it?

Comment on Creativity can’t skip a beat. by G.B. Veerman

Wed, 16 May 2007 15:27:22 +0000

Tom,
Yes, be sure to take your own medicine. It’s right there in your second-to-last paragraph.

Spring is a great time to smell the roses — and thank God (and balloon speed) there will be a lot of both for you after this. Best wishes,
Greg

Comment on Creativity can’t skip a beat. by Tom Monahan

Wed, 09 May 2007 21:25:35 +0000

Thanks, peeps. I’m back, but maybe not at the previous activity level, as it’s difficult to write blog posts and smell the proverbial roses at the same time.

Comment on Creativity can’t skip a beat. by Marty Baker

Wed, 09 May 2007 14:55:29 +0000

Tom, happy to hear you got rid of that time bomb. I did a commercial recently at Washington Hospital Center about the cath lab. The tech guy told me during a break that most of the people that come in for procedure aren’t the chubby guys, it’s the thin guys like Letterman.

Interestingly enough, you use the MPH (speed) metaphor in your Lobotomy Book. Stay well, keep blogging.

Comment on Creativity can’t skip a beat. by overcaffeinatedkatie

Wed, 09 May 2007 14:27:13 +0000

Hey Tom - I’m glad you’re okay, had very much noticed your absence these last few days. Take care. (And don’t read “Everyman” by Philip Roth… at least not until you’re back to 100%.)

If it’s not too crass, any thoughts on drafty hospital gowns as compared to open-ended ideas/strategy? Or maybe watching your six in the next client meeting? Ah the posting opportunities are endless!

Comment on Creativity can’t skip a beat. by Ernie Schenck

Wed, 09 May 2007 13:05:11 +0000

It’s okay you haven’t posted in a while, Tom. Just don’t let it happen again:)

Comment on Good is the enemy of great by Tom Monahan

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:45:05 +0000

In a discussion about one of the new radio voices of the Boston Red Sox my brother-in-law quoted Jonathan Swift: “Mediocrity always has the advantage over genius in a world dominated by fools.”

In Swift’s time I bet good was ranked above mediocre. Today I think they’re about the same.

Comment on The creative opportunity no one wanted by Tom Monahan

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:10:15 +0000

Before we speculate how many opportunities of this sort fit on the head of a pin I should repeat, this advertiser will never be confused with Nike.

That said, Rich, you bring up some good points. Maybe the bigger they are the harder they fall, i.e. the more invisible and backward a marketer is around communications, maybe when they see the light they are more willing to make the leap because even a giant step isn’t enough. I’m not sure.

I’ve often thought that the people who need great work the most should be the targets of the best ad agencies. However, when I started my ad agency I learned quickly that companies who were doing weak work were often doing it for a reason. Usually simply lack of appreciation for its benefits.

However, an indicator that an historically “bad” advertiser is ready for an upgrade is when some other company in their category proves that big, conceptual work makes a difference. That often shakes loose the inertia.

I actually believe the odds of these type of miracles are a bit better than your 1 in 3,563,608.83 (I’ll have to trust you on the math). Numbers don’t sweat about losing their jobs. People in companies that need to change sweat a lot. About 737% more than average people, for those counting

[BTW, I now understand why otherwise mature adults use that silly smiley thing. I didn’t want to offend a contributor to my blog, but I couldn’t hold back my wise ass tone. I believe it’s the first time I’ve used this clever device, for those counting ]