Of lunatics and asylums
25 Feb 2010
Creative people - and I say this as someone who still counts himself among them, even though I pick up a pen in anger fairly rarely these days - are awful. Selfish, egocentric, lazy, bad-tempered and, worst of all, just dreadfully conservative. We hate change. We think things were brilliant in the past, are much worse in the present and will be absolutely awful in the future.
Which is why I respond extremely cautiously, to say the least, to the new Big Idea that has swept across a large chunk of my agency group (not, actually, including my own agency, Tangible, or at least not yet).
This new Big Idea is something called Co-Creation, and it’s championed by one of the agencies within my group, Face, who indeed describe themselves as Co-Creation specialists. If you want to know more about it please visit http://ldn.co-creationhub.com/, but in a nutshell the Big Idea is that Big Ideas about brands - new products, websites, comms, ads, promotions, whatever - should be developed by means of a process that involves groups of people from the client company, from the agency and from the target market all working together in a collaborative process.
This is clearly an idea that brings multiple zeitgeisty things together into a single uber-zeitgeist. There’s the whole crowd-sourcing thing, the user-generated content thing, the interactive thing, the social networks thing, the collaborative working thing, the online research thing (Face are originally a market research company) and all sorts of other things you can read about in Revolution and New Media Age all brought together into a single process. Face are doing very well with it - so well that various other parts of my group have decided that they want a piece of the co-creation action, and have joined together to establish the Co-Creation Hub thing whose web address I gave you a minute ago.
If you visit it for a moment, you’ll understand why I approach it with extreme caution - the kind of caution with which a platoon in Helmand Province approaches a bump in the road with wires protruding from it. On the home page, for example, you’ll see a link to a White Paper called “Do Brands Really Need Agencies?”. And although the white paper concludes that they may do, kind of, it certainly seems that they don’t need agencies’ creative departments: instead, they need a series of workshops made up of clients and consumers and moderated by people from Face.
My problem - and, I suspect, the problem of 99% of creative people - begins right at the beginning, with the Co-Creation Hub strapline. This says simply “Doing Things With, Not At.” I get it. Of course I get it. I’ve read all the case studies, seen all the online co-created businesses, learned how you can harness the energy and enthusiasm of consumers to shape and build your brand. (It also hasn’t escaped my attention that this is an extremely cheap way of maintaining a brand, a significant point in these tough times.)
But, like 99% of creative people, I don’t basically buy it. I don’t basically accept that the best way to do creative things is “with, not at.” From Romeo and Juliet to the Shake’n'Vac commercial, all the great flowerings of creativity have been done at, not with. Like 99% of creative people I accept that up to a point, the consumer and indeed the client can play a valuable part in this process. We need to listen to them, engage with them, understand them. But there comes a point where you have to send all those people away, close the door, wrap a towel round your head, and either on your own or with a trusted partner stay in that room until inspiration strikes.
After that, you may well go back to everyone - clients, colleagues, consumers - to make sure that your great idea works as you thought and hoped it would. And after that, you may need all sorts of co-creationists (photographers, film directors, illustrators, actors, whatever) to give substance to your creation. But the actual creative process itself isn’t with, it’s at. And it isn’t co-, it’s solo.
In saying this, I know I’m sounding like a dinosaur. At the very least I’m deeply, deeply out of fashion - Face are developing their co-creation business about 20 times quicker than any other part of the group, including my bit. And actually, I’m almost certain that it’s worse than that. This isn’t just a fashion thing, it’s a step change, and there’s no going back.
That being so, I’m delighted that my group is right at the forefront of the change. And not least as someone who holds quite a few shares in it, I enthusiastically encourage everyone to visit http://ldn.co-creationhub.com/, to get in touch with my co-creationist colleagues and, if you’re a client with a large budget, to allocate it to them immediately.
But as an agency creative who has been surrounded for decades by clients, account handlers, planners and researchers all bitterly resenting the way that this stroppy, difficult, lazy bunch of people get almost all the glory going despite playing such a limited part in the process, I can’t help suspecting that at another level, the success of co-creation reflects a long-sought opportunity for revenge.
With researchers, clients and consumers in charge of the whole creative process, it’s not that the lunatics have taken over the asylum. On the contrary, it’s that the asylum is now firmly back under the control of the warders and the administrators.
This entry was posted on Thursday, February 25th, 2010 at 10:53 am and is filed under Agencies, Brand, Internet . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

5 Responses to “Of lunatics and asylums”
McMurphy Says:
In that case, maybe it’s time for CEO’s to have fools, like kings used to, who bop them over the head with a pig’s bladder tied to a stick whenever they come up with an “initiative” or worse, an “idea”.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:01 am
Francesco D'Orazio Says:
if there’s one single thing that co-creation helped us do is actually leaving the asylum that’s been the playground of agencies, and their only space of existence, for a longtime.
At this point in time I’d rather wonder who’s been left in the asylum and how longer the asylum is going to stay open. over and out
and obviously, no resentment
March 1st, 2010 at 11:45 pm
spooner Says:
As I said to you in passing Lucian, much like the mac, co-creation is a wonderful servant but a terrible master. I also wonder if you might not perhaps be suggesting that the crowd-sourcing and co-creation cells of the venn diagram overlap a little more than our esteemed Farm colleagues suggest they do? I shall be interested to monitor the progress of this already lively debate!
March 2nd, 2010 at 3:59 pm
Andrew Needham Says:
Hey Lucian,
Please see my response to this on the Face blog - http://www.facegroup.co.uk
Thanks,
Andrew
March 5th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
@mikeriddell62 Says:
Oh dear, I fear that change is scaring the hell out of you. Well you’re not alone. i work in the retail property industry and people there are clinging on to the familiar processes in spite of the fact that they clearly no longer work in this digital day and age.
For me, Neil Young’s line sums it up perfectly…”it’s easy to get stuck in the past, when you try to make a good thing last”.
Just go with the flow, man!
March 6th, 2010 at 6:43 am