For communications professionals charged with the task of creating the content and design for branding or other strategic initiatives, it’s easy sometimes to develop an “us” versus “them” mindset when it comes to the creative process.

Whether you’re a writer, photographer, creative director or graphic designer, there’s likely been a number of times when you’ve grumbled a bit under your breath because the client didn’t “get it” when you presented your brilliant branding solution or innovative design idea. Or maybe the corporate committee or overworked communications manager with the client company made so many changes to your idea that now it’s a muddy, murky mess in your mind.

Last month and again this month, we’re focusing in our feature article on the question of how “creatives” and “suits” come to agreement on when a project is “good enough.” For the “creatives,” it can sometimes be all about the quality and beauty of the work, and less about the objective of accomplishing a particular communications goal or strategy. For the “suits,” the corporate process of decision-making and consensus building can be difficult waters to navigate and still emerge with an effective solution that has creative beauty.

But the biggest challenge of all is to fight the “us” versus “them” mindset that can easily rear its ugly head, turning a collaborative approach to problem-solving into a turf war over who has the best idea or who is to blame for the end project being less than what everyone involved had hoped for.

As communications professionals, we clearly ought to focus our energies first and foremost on doing our best job of communicating with those we are partnering with on projects. Putting aside the “us” versus “them” mindset and encouraging a creative process that recognizes both the need for well defined objectives — and creative solutions that reach those objectives — will always ensure that our finished work is not just “good enough” but something that brings satisfaction and a sense of well-being at the end of the day.

In last month’s issue of MindFire, we asked two communications colleagues who work on the corporate/business side of the fence to answer the question: “Have you worked with designers, writers or other creative providers where there was a tension or difference of opinion about when a project is ‘good enough’? How do you negotiate the end to a project? How do you know when it’s time to ‘ship’?”

This month we continue that discussion by posing similar questions to two communications professionals from the “creative” side of the equation who offer their opinions on how they work to ensure that their best work sees the light of day while still meeting the objectives and needs of the client.

Ed Collevecchio, owner of Creative Associates in Raleigh, and Billy Barnes, Creative Director at Howard, Merrell & Partners in Raleigh, both weigh in with their thoughts on the question of how to successfully negotiate when a project is “good enough” to ship and how to ensure that the end result is something both parties can be proud to put their names on.
Q. Describe a situation in which there was tension or a difference of opinion about when a project was “good enough” to ship?
Barnes: “Deadlines are a part of life in advertising. As creatives, we deal with them on a daily basis. So you often wish you had more time. The best always want to try to make “good enough” better. I think a big misconception some people have is that a creative team is just being difficult when they ask for more time — that they’re disregarding schedules and timelines. Now don’t get me wrong, there are creatives who are terrible with schedules and timelines. And we can be pains in the ass. But generally, we just want to do great work for the client. So the motives are usually good. Besides, a little tension is healthy, right?

Ideally, there shouldn’t be a battle between business goals and creativity integrity.  One shouldn’t have to be sacrificed for the other. If the whole team is communicating, and the agency as a whole agrees on the kind of work it wants to be known for, then the question of what’s “good enough” is understood. The key is to make sure your “good enough” is still always better than the best most other agencies can ever do.”

Collevecchio: “I don’t recall an instance where there was tension or a difference of opinion surrounding the completion or shipping of a project. There have been cases where either or both the client and our team would have liked to tweak a few details, but understood that the deadline would no longer allow for that.

It is interesting, however, that if a client feels very, very strongly that something should change at the last minute, the deadline becomes less important and may be moved altogether. Much of our current work is published online and I think that contributes to an attitude that even after deployment, a project can be edited or adjusted. In the days when we were producing most of our work as print, changes after publishing was a very different thing.”
Q. How do you negotiate a solution that pleases your client and still satisfies your agency’s need to produce work you’re proud of?

Barnes: “It is really important to do work you’re proud of. It helps attract and retain good talent and good clients. So if we need more time, we’ll get the team together and talk about it. Most clients are pretty reasonable. If we called one up and said, ‘Listen, we’re supposed to show you a campaign next Tuesday but we’ve had a last minute thought that we’d love to explore and we’d like two more days,’ most of our clients are going to say ‘absolutely.’ If we communicate well and we’re honest with each other, it’s rarely a problem.

Our project managers are vital when it comes to stuff like this. They keep us on track and keep everyone informed of what’s going on so there aren’t any surprises. Well OK, fewer surprises. They’ll kick us creatives in the butt when we need to get a move on. Or they’ll help find us a day or two extra when we need it.”

Collevecchio: “First, we never provide filler concepts or directions. We only pitch ideas that work for the client and that we can live with. Nothing is worse than tossing in a bad idea to ‘make three’ and then the client selects it. If you don’t have a good ‘third,’ pitch two.

Many years ago, we had an Italian restaurant chain as a client. The founder was an energetic entrepreneur who was very involved in every detail of the business. He loved to come to the shop and brainstorm about menu design and promotions. Once, when we were working on some new menus, we presented one design after another for weeks, none of which he would approve. Eventually, he told us to abandon all of our design sensibilities.

I sat him down for a frank talk in which I said that our company had a mission, just like his company had a mission. His mission was to deliver high-quality, high-value Italian food in a friendly, attentive environment. Like his mission, ours was two-fold — to provide good design that worked for our clients. They come together as a package — no exceptions. If a customer walked into his restaurant and asked for a burrito, he could not serve him one because that was not his mission. Likewise, I could not serve my customer a burrito.

He asked me what that meant and I told him that we would not abandon our design principles, but we would do one more design. If he did not like it and approve it, we would have to find another agency for him. Well, he loved the final design (surprise!) and our relationship continued. At CA, this has become known as the ‘Burrito Principle.’ ”

Linda can be contacted at Linda@LindaGupton.com or 919-971-2027

Because I believe that storytelling is central to all communication, I am always on the lookout for resources that broaden my awareness of how stories are being shaped and how their use is shaping our lives.

In her book, “The Idea Writers,” Teressa Iezzi explores the challenges copywriters face in today’s market. One of the primary hurdles is telling a consistent story over multiple platforms and keeping the audience involved throughout. The ability to see the design and arc of a message and then be able to communicate it over channels as diverse as websites, social media, interactive games, company intranet sites, permission texting campaigns, and even traditional advertising media is proving to be a daunting hurdle to cross.

Although fewer people are reading print advertising or even long-form copy on the web, the need for powerful writing has become ever more important. The ability to tell engaging stories is key to creating a meaningful brand identity that moves people to take action. Even if you’re only making the occasional post on Facebook or Twitter, you are  still a writer telling a story.

Because people read what’s interesting to them – not what we tell them to – it’s critical for us to understand the desires of the people we want to reach then communicate in a way they want to interact with. More than ever, we have to earn our way into people’s lives.

As professional communicators, we are responsible for putting stories into the world. In the words of Iezzi, those stories should be “useful, entertaining, or beautiful — or all of those things. They should make people feel better — not worse — about themselves, the brand involved, and living in the world in general.”

Well said.

When I started the MindFire initiative over a year ago, my intent was to build a community interested in bridging the chasm of misunderstanding that I believe separates many of the professionals who work in the various fields of communication.

Communications professionals are increasingly subdivided into a vast array of specialized fields — public relations, marketing, graphic design, speech writing, public presentation, advertising, internal communications, photography, web development, SEO and many others.

My frequent interaction with people in all of these specialized areas of the communication business — as well as countless small business owners who are trying to find their way when it comes to effective communications strategy — brought me to the epiphany that I could help build some bridges to share insights and information that would help us all.

My original vision for this newsletter was to build the foundation of the MindFire community with visionaries who would contribute articles a couple of times a year on their areas of expertise. One bit of clarity that came rather quickly was that there are a number of brilliant thinkers who can’t write well — and other great thinkers who can write, but who don’t understand the concept of deadlines.

Rather than missing out on the insights these folks can offer, we’re launching this newsletter in a new direction that features interviews focused around a single issue or theme.

My wife, Linda, has been working with MindFire from the outset editing articles, but will now join forces with me as a writer and collaborator in the production of every issue. Linda is an accomplished writer and editor with more than 30 years of experience in the world of both business/corporate communications and journalism. She has recently returned to freelance writing after a stint as a features editor for an area newspaper. We look forward to working together to provide you with “burning ideas for communication in business.”

The change in format also has us returning to a monthly rather than a twice-a-month schedule of publication. If you have an article or an insight related to business communication that would span the interests of communications professionals, please contact us. We’d love to hear your feedback and ideas. And thank you for your commitment to our profession.

Charles can be contacted at cg@charlesguptonphoto.com or 919-859-9898

As communications professionals, we’ve all faced the dilemma of deciding when a project is “good enough.” Making the call on when to halt the process of tweaking and perfecting a creative idea and accepting that it’s time to “ship” can often be the source of great tension between “creative types” and “suits.”

So how do we reach that point where we know it’s time to exit the creative process and let the project see the light of day? How do we negotiate that end point in a way that leaves everyone involved in the project feeling good about the outcome?

This month, we asked Sherry Bastion, web creative director/team lead in global web design and development with Lenovo US, and Robin Deacle, vice president of corporate communications with the N.C. Biotechnology Center, to share thoughts from the buyer’s perspective on the question: “Are there times when good enough ….is? How do you know when it’s time to stop work and ship a project?

Q. Have you worked with designers, writers or other creative providers where there was a tension or difference of opinion about when a project is “good enough?”

Deacle: “There are definitely times when tension can occur. A lot of the time, that tension results from a difference over the vision for what is to be accomplished. Everybody has a picture in mind when beginning work on a project. The more everyone articulates what that picture looks like in their minds, making sure we’re all on the same page, the better the outcome.

Bastion: “Most designers that I’ve worked with are never really satisfied with their work. When your work has your name on it, and your talent and your reputation are associated with it, anyone worth their salt will do a good job at whatever cost. But too many designers love the solution they’ve come up with so much that they want to force the client to accept it because they (the designers) like it. They should try asking, “Tell me what it is that I’ve done here that doesn’t solve X problem?” The designer needs to hear what the client says, but I also fault the client for trying to do the job of the designer as well at times.”

Q. How do you negotiate the end to a project? How do you know when it’s time to “ship?”

Bastion: “Agreeing on the goals up front would cure many of the problems associated with deciding when a project is “good enough.” Without a context for what we’re trying to accomplish, we end up arguing over ideas about what’s good, but we’re not asking whether the idea matches up with what the goal is.”

Deacle: “I’m really looking at the business goals when I work on a project. It’s great to create for creativity’s sake, but we’re producing projects that support particular business goals. Most of the vendors I work with see the project from the perspective of the business goal. But they’re also trying to put something out there that represents them well. They want to be able to say that I did this piece and it really represents me, my work and myself. Marrying that desire with the business goal we’re trying to accomplish is the trick.”

Linda can be contacted at Linda@LindaGupton.com or 919-859-2027

In next month’s issue, we’ll continue the discussion by sharing the perspective of those who provide creative content and design. Please feel free to join the discussion by adding your comments to this month’s feature.

What do you want people to feel when they come into contact with your company?

Because your brand is a living organism in the minds of your customers, you need to design the kinds of scenarios they should be feeling every time they experience you.

The authors of “Do You Matter?” trot out many of the same examples we’ve seen numerous times to showcase well-designed customer experiences – Apple, Harley Davidson, and Virgin Airlines, among them. But they do so in a compelling way that looks at the many facets of the total experience one has when doing business with each of the companies.

In an age of specialization, many businesses are inclined to hire a “branding” firm to create or fix a brand without realizing that the necessary and difficult work of establishing a brand starts with the core values and culture of the company. A brand is not a logo and it’s not what a company says it is.

The authors point out that a company’s brand starts with what an individual customer believes it is in her gut. A customer cares about what she wants, and what she wants is to believe she matters and that her experiences make her feel more alive. When enough individuals have the same gut feeling, then you have a brand. It’s not what you say it is, it’s what they say it is.

Because the design of great branding entails risk, it’s crucial to have a leadership and a culture that embraces the required time and investment of resources needed to see the fruit come, the authors emphasize. Risk and failure are necessary if a company is going to move the “experience” bar forward.

The primary fault I see with this book lies with the title. Because many of the people who see it may limit their reference to the elements of graphic design, they’ll miss out on the understanding of the total identity design of a company, which the authors intended.

If there’s a foundational question you could ask that could radically transform the experience a customer has with your company, it would be, “What is it that people really want out of life and how can my company deliver it?” A simple, well-designed answer will truly cause your customers to believe that they matter to you. And that you matter to them.

The fall MindFire Bonfire event is scheduled for Saturday, November 5th at the home of Charles and Linda. The weather date, if we need to postpone, will be the following Saturday, Nov. 12th. Details will follow in a separate email invitation. You may register for the event at Eventbrite now, if you’d like.

I love my garden. When the spring soil warms to the point we can begin to plant, I can barely contain my desire to get transplants and seeds of every description in the ground -tomatoes, peppers, lettuce, carrots, onions, peas, potatoes, corn – the list goes on.

But in my early enthusiasm, what I often forget is the maintenance required at appropriate times, especially the need for water when we go into several weeks of drought. And the weeds that seem to grow without water. And the pests that readily consume plants that are already struggling.

I mention this because it closely mirrors my enthusiasm — and the subsequent reality that seems to follow — as I make commitments on various projects that I’m asked to work on, especially those for non-profits and the personal projects that I need for my own growth. I’m excited in the early stages of planning, but as the project “seeds” start to germinate and the various elements get put in place (or sometimes delayed), I forget just how much attention each project is going to demand.

What invariably seems to happen is that a billable project comes in and requires immediate attention. That leads to a great load of guilt and stress over my prior commitments that will now get delayed, sometimes straining relationships. Investing the time and attention necessary to build healthy and profitable alliances and then not keeping them well nourished is not only unprofitable, but also damaging to one’s reputation. None of us wants to be labeled as a person who doesn’t keep his or her word.

You may be different, but what I have to learn in my quest to make a difference, is to not plant more commitments than I can reasonably “water” and maintain.

What do you think?

Based in Raleigh, N.C., Charles Gupton photographs real people, really well. He loves listening to others’ stories and relishes the challenge of telling those stories visually. He is, after 30 years in this business, more excited than ever about creating images that communicate, while also ensuring that his subjects and clients come away with a remarkable experience.
cg@charlesguptonphoto.com
www.charlesguptonphoto.com
www.charlesgupton.com

Most people share a mistrust of brainstorming meetings. They feel contrived, high pressure and hollow, without context. Add strangers to the mix and we worry if we’ll work well as a team. And if you’re in mixed company, too often the creative people feel pressure to come up with the best ideas.

Don’t get me wrong. I love working with other people. In fact, the highest compliment you can pay me is to say you like partnering with me. I just think if you’re looking for a great idea, traditional brainstorming isn’t the way.

Last week, I found myself at a conference of AIGA, the professional association for design leaders, working on a small team with eight strangers to solve an organizational problem and deliver a solution the next morning. But instead of calling them brainstorming sessions (or the conference favorite: “break out sessions”), they were called prototype sessions.

Prototype: An early sample or model built to test a concept or process or to
act as a thing to be replicated or learned from. (Thanks, Wikipedia.)

I love the key words here: “sample,” “test,” “act,” “learned from.” Note that it’s not about a finished ad, logo sketch or tagline. It’s something to learn from—not something to do.
The goal of our prototype session was to find ways to incorporate lifelong design education into AIGA. And the beauty of our session was that we’d been prepped well:

1. FODDER: We all signed up for this session before the conference. And in the day or so before, most of the Prototype session topics were covered in general session.

2. FOCUS: We had clear goals: To create a sentence or 5-word mission statement, elevator speech and 1-week/6-month/1-year launch plan. And do all this within a certain time limit.

3. FINISH: We had to present something, so we knew the idea should be fleshed out enough that it could communicate well with attendees.

Each of these goals became our common purpose. In the end, we came to a very human, real prototype to test. So let’s stop storming brains. Instead, create context by prepping well, and encourage success by setting clear goals with a deadline.

Laura Hamlyn is a Creative Director specializing in branding and corporate identity,as well as environmental, interactive and multimedia design. She also serves on the board of AIGA Raleigh, as Director of Design Ability Programming. She can be reached at laura.barnes@gmail.com and (919) 345-0361

Doctors are intelligent, highly-trained specialists – yet they understand that the knowledge base in their fields strains the limits of human infallibility, especially in an increasingly complex and distracting world. So, doctors (and nurses) make effective use of a simple, proven tool: the checklist.

Short checklists have had a significant, often profound, impact on improving performance in many areas of medicine. They’ve also helped avert disasters in the aviation industry, where it’s the pilots ability to count on checklists that enables their skill and nerve to work so well. We’re not afraid to ride in high-speed elevators in tall buildings because the construction industry has mastered the use of checklists.

Checklists increase performance without additional training – just as new skis can improve a skier’s control, even with less effort. Furthermore, by ensuring that the basics are remembered, checklists not only minimize error, but also free the mind to consider things that are “unchecklistable” and do require expertise and experience. Finally, checklists facilitate rapid and effective communication. Incorporating new knowledge in a way that ensures immediate widespread adoption.

Unfortunately, checklists are often viewed negatively as a “dumb” tool to fix “dumb mistakes.” Actually, checklists embody something described in a previous MindFire article: putting success above ego. One needs to merely follow a checklist (or the person reading it, like a co-pilot or scrub nurse) to improve performance. And checklists aren’t crutches – they don’t target a defect, or imply incompetence.

“The Checklist Manifesto” by Atul Gawande is a great read on this topic (and the inspiration for this article). Closely-related to checklists are flowcharts, useful as visual guides once they are complete, and tremendously effective in facilitating up front communication and planning by making goals and plans explicit.

Eric Harris, PhD is a member of the Society for the Advancement of Brain Analysis, and a former Senior Scientist in the pharmaceutical industry, infamous with coworkers for continually saying “Let’s make a flowchart!”. Contact Eric at brainski2@gmail.com.