Suresh Dinakaran's Blog

 

Fandom: Fandom refers to a community of people who are passionate about something, whether it’s a film, a band, a television show, a book, or a sports team, a brand or an operating system. A die-hard fan is someone who is strongly or fanatically determined or devoted, strongly resisting change.

 

And the following, the craze, the obsession, the advocacy , the possessiveness, the blind faith, the brand love continues unabashed even though their team is losing or the film is a flop or their single album has under-delivered or the TV Show ratings are nothing to write home about. Our affiliations give us a sense of status and identity within a community. Remember- People like us do things like this. Birds of the same feather…

 

This also extends to our choice of automobiles, noodles or our leanings to a political party or a leader. Rational has nothing to do with this. The emotional connection is so strong that rules of confirmation bias( due respect to Cialdini) get re-written. Belief is created even when reason and possibility dictated otherwise.

 

The connection with a logo or a team or an individual is so all-encompassing that the fan continues to turn up in large numbers even though the team is losing or the celebrity is well and over the hill to command that blind adulation, or the leader is not worthy of advocacy.

If you have earned and enhanced your self-worth by being the devoted, selfless, loyal fan, you can use your voice to address the wrongs that the leadership is doing because when fans speak up, there is a high probability that the other side will listen. Be generous with your voice. Therein lies your ‘test‘.

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome to the post-entertainment society. Where(unfortunately), culture has taken an infinite sabbatical( coerced into, I dare add).

 

It is the year of the Presidential elections in the US and we would have the ubiquitous ” State Of The Union ” speech. Nothing much changes in politics- your local grocery would have more variety to offer. That is why the need of the hour for all of us in The Creator Economy is to have a ” State Of The Culture ” speech.

 

The year 2024 has already been a tumultuous, fast paced and dangerous time for the creative economy(if one can still call it that). Entertainment will be soon writing its obituary, forgive my sounding alarmist.

 

If one were to equate politics with culture, the two pegs on which culture thrives are Arts and Entertainment. We have already seen the HIPPO in the room there was undeniably Entertainment, by a long way and Arts got relegated if not subsumed totally. Call it collateral damage if you may.

 

That is not the point here but. What we are witnessing is a post-entertainment culture where the arts is certainly not getting a helping hand. Worse, the big daddy aka Entertainment is in hot waters too. Big studios viz Disney, Paramount, Universal, Warner etc are on delicate ice. Layoffs, having to release a big film on OTT within a few days of theatrical release, hiving off business divisions and canceling movie releases seem to be the order of the day amongst these established giants. Music labels see more value in artists who are old than young, dead than alive( look at Sony Music’s acquisition of Michael Jackson’s catalog of songs for US$ 1.2 Billion).

What is causing this tectonic shift? Swiping, scrolling, wasting time or call it whatever you may want to. The non-stop run of ceaseless(meaningless) activity. And who is the boss here? Yes, you guessed it right- distraction– a few seconds of dopamine hits, is all that it takes and BigSocialMediaTech( TikTok, YouTube, Meta, Instagram, Twitter etc) are playing all the best cards they have to ensure a non-stop supply where looking up from our ‘domicile of nirvana‘(mobile phones) is made to seem like an avoidable, painful chore.

 

This is the best ” rewards program ” on the planet. AmEx etc are you guys listening?  Sell our attention cheap(and carelessly) to the predators listed above and in return get bouts of the neurochemical dopamine to feel good and trigger the stimuli to rinse and repeat. You by now know where we are headed. The cycle of consumption, reward, repetition is so habit forming that we are hooked(with no line, no sinker). Addiction is a better terminology. And billions are unwitting volunteers in the biggest social engineering experiment in human history.

The goal of the giants of social media is only one- amp up the ‘ addiction quotient ‘. Get people to crave more, day in, day out. Make them feel pulverised at missing out-FOMO(Fear of Missing Out) if you may. Create a world of junkies where they are the dealers and the peddlers. And laugh their way to the bank. Everything is designed in a manner to lock users into an addictive cycle. Fixate you with dependent junkie status. Optimize the dopamine doom loop. And the virtual reality headsets that the likes of Apple, Facebook etc are urging you to try out raise more concerns-as they rewire users’ brains.

 

Even the dumbest entertainment( read a goofy looking cat video) would seem like Macbeth. Or a photo of a hamburger would do just as nicely.

 

Welcome to the new culture- sorry mindless entertainment- sorry compulsive activity- sorry dopamine addiction!

 

The clock is ticking or is it TikToking?

 

The caption is inspired by the origins in Matthew 13:12 of the King James Version of the Bible.

 

Driving scarcity and craving exclusivity is an acquired prerogative. A false entitlement. The myth floating around is that excluding or leaving behind people actually benefits the people who are doing the excluding. That by keeping them at a distance and putting barriers on participation will work to the advantage of those who do that.

But in a zeitgeist where connection, collaboration and community bring momentum, possibility and the network effect, with the magic of combining ideas and people, making things scarce or exclusive runs counter to that. If at all, we need more creators, more artists, more musicians, more coders, more designers, more scientists, more front line workers, more entrepreneurs, more educators because what they contribute when they get the education and the opportunity benefits everyone. In case that opportunity is deprived, we actually pay for it, we end up being the losers. Being poorer for it.

Depriving others by staking your claim to be exclusive is retrogressive. Agreed you might get the chance to be labeled” Ivy League ” when in effect you are actually putting the breaks on people moving forward. This is no wheat and chaff. There is potential and promise and talent can meet the opportunity, if offered gracefully. In a philharmonic orchestra, there are sax and cello players, drummers and trumpeters, the clarinet and trombone players, the pianists and the horn instrumentalists, while playing from the same hymn sheet, create the magic of harmony because of inclusion and through diversity.

 

We need to be undoing the toxic myth of exclusion and scarcity.

 

Artificial intelligence. Sophisticated UI|UX design. Predictive analytics. Recommendation engines. The Algorithm salsa. All of these have seemingly made the job of brands, marketers and organisations much easier than before. The outcome has been creating a large corpus of convenience for customers who have fallen for it, hook, line and sinker.

 

If we were to look t the trifecta of human consumption and associated behaviour, it would ride on the trinity of convenience, status and affinity.

 

Convenience sells. Ask Amazon. And well before the world’s biggest online shopping mall permeated(trespassed?) our homes and lives lives for all things necessary and otherwise, convenience became the dominant force in our culture with product innovations like the microwave oven, the washing machine, the drive through fast food joint, the remote control, the automatic gears in your car and from the not so distant past articulating your voice over 140 characters on Twitter. We happily pay ‘ convenience fee ‘ to travel brands and airports. Can you beat it? And rather than creating more than we can consume, we fall prey to perennial doom scrolling and taking in all types of information, dis|mis information and be led by vested interests. The ROI on convenience is questionable.

 

And in the (must)scalable industrial complex of education, convenience holds the Doctorate. Howard Gardener might have had a theory of multiple intelligence (where each individual is as different from the other as possible) but education would have none of it- so, the outcome is standardised tests(you see one size fits all), a rigid curricula that never was sensitive to the heterogenous aptitudes and skill sets of the students and terms that seem to have emerged straight from the Republic of Shackles– Test, Conform, Uniform, Comply, Adhere, Standardise…toe the line…

 

If education were to segue into learning( which is what it ought to be in the first place), effort and discomfort will be its allies. Treading the path less trodden, embracing inconvenience in the quest for something new but better and realising unabashed curiosity can skill the cat. Explore the unexplored. Moving the needle from where we are to where we want to be. From status quo to status novis.

Con venience anyone?

 

It is highly unlikely that creators are in the quest to deliver mediocre work. That, in spite of being at the wrong end of clients who are lazy, selfish and think the short-term. Or the boss who does not care enough to up the ante. We have often heard the refrain ” I am doing this boring, banal, insipid, uninspiring, mediocre work because that’s what the client wants “.

 

The above is the harsh reality. Unfortunately so. Response to such situations can throw two sets of possibilities:-

 

• Persuade the client to let you do great work. I know it is easier said than done, but it is worth the effort I promise. Who knows, wiser counsel may prevail
• Or better, go find better clients who are prepared to sing from the same hymn sheet as you

 

The onus is on you- if you, the creator, conduct yourself and act in a manner which demonstrates that you deserve better clients, sooner than later you begin to get better clients. Then the linear sequence does not offer any room for compromise. You deliver great work because you damn well talk the talk and walk the walk.

 

What we have to be grateful for is the fact that there are better clients. They are a minority but they exist. Who have the grace and the vision, the gall and the gumption, the guts and the grit to waltz with you. You owe it to them. We thank them.

 

 

 

Our culture seems to applaud the spirit, gumption and promise of beginnings. We admire the entry, when people launch themselves into something new, plan and execute a new project, take on important work, get married, embark on an adventure( if you see a connect between marriage and adventure and the natural sequence in which it got written here, good for you!). These are likely to be moments of hope, optimism, possibilities, expectations as we compose the next chapter for ourselves. We give kudos to someone who is entrepreneurial, who paves a path for herself, who has a plan for what’s next and can plot the strategy to move from here to there. Almost as if to say they have all been co-authors of ” What got you here won’t get you there “. Actually, a book written by Dr Marshall Goldsmith (Author), Mark Reiter (Author).

 

By contrast, our exits are often ignored or invisible. They seem to represent the negative spaces of our life narratives. There is little appreciation or applause when we decide( or when it is decided for us) that it is time to move on. We often slink away in the night, hoping that no one will notice, that the darkness will make the departure disappear. If the entry recalls a straight and erect posture, a person who is strong and determined, then we imagine a person stooped, weakened, and despairing as she makes her exit.

 

This cultural regard or stereotyping of exit is troublesome in a society where leave-taking are the norms, where for example, multiple marriages end in divorce forcing tortured exits, publicly exposed and privately endured, where millions of immigrants leave their domicile(exiting the place where their lives and families have been rooted) to find their ‘pot of gold’ in completely unchartered waters, rupturing their cultural traditions and practices, where demographics predict that our young adults will not have ten jobs but ten careers- and it will be crucial that they learn not just the art of beginning anew but also the grit and grace of good exits, where in these tough economic times, the agony of exits seem to be the dominant narrative, where the depleted job market forces young graduates to move back under their parents’ roofs, postponing the exits that were long planned and producing a developmental condition that psychologists have begin to describe-pejoratively-as a ” failure to launch “. And the last nail in the coffin(forgive the pun here) is the inevitable exit of death that begs for more clear-eyed and respectful attention, more beautiful rituals and cultural honoring.

 

Visual reminders of exits surround us each day of our lives, guiding our moves, anticipating our turns, flashing directions to us. Be it the parking lot or the flight attendant demonstrating or the fake voice on our GPS- the exits glowing white letters on green metal- mark distance, time, effort, belonging( exit 39 on Sh Zayed Road in Dubai brings back fond memories for me as I dropped my daughter off to her school every morning). Whether it is a theatre director following the playwrights cue telling actors when to exit(left or right of stage) or accepting the fate of the lousy hand a poker player was dealt when he “folds”, leaving the table and exiting on his own terms, the reminders are omnipresent.

 

Exits as we can see are ubiquitous, marking the physical landscapes we inhabit, embedded in our language and metaphors, embroidered into the historical narrative of nations, braided into the sequence and arc of our individual development, shaped by the contemporary scene of our economic crises and global mobility and laced into the intergenerational tensions and discourses in our families and communities. Perhaps it is the very ordinariness, familiarity and ubiquity of our experiences of exit that make them invisible to us. And perhaps it is our overvaluing of the launch, the promise of entry, and the hopefulness of beginning, that render our exits ignoble by contrast.

 

” Every exit is an entry somewhere else “- Tom Stoppard

 

So, what is your exit strategy?

 

Au revoir !

 

As contrary to conventional wisdom and logic as it may seem, physical flaws, it turns out, create an instant appeal to others. We are duped into believing that the pretty, the pristine, the perfect get all the perks, all the glory and and all the breaks. When in reality it is not exactly that at all.

 

There is a reason why we lean towards the average. Research done by University of Texas scientists hypothesized that individuals with features close to the mean of the population are viewed as less likely to carry genetic mutations and, therefore, we unconsciously see them as being ‘ normal ‘ for our species. Whereas beauty is seen as a deviation from the norm and a genetic defect.

 

Average as beauty is timeless, universal and appealing. Sorry to disappoint all those with killer looks!

 

According to Dr Stephen Marquardt, a reconstructive surgeon in Southern California, the ‘ perfect ‘ face isn’t a creation of Hollywood or advertising agencies but is actually based on a simple mathematical formula  known as the Golden Ratio. Beauty, it turns out, is not in the eye of the beholder but in a mathematical calculation.

 

If we were to segue back to the US Presidential elections in 2000 and 2004: Al Gore and John Kerry(both presidential candidates) came across as too-handsome con men against the average-looking George Bush. His comical-looking big ears were a conspicuous flaw often magnified in caricatures. Americans not only felt that Bush would do the right thing, but they also felt a Darwinian-like need to rally behind and protect him- the unattractive(by classical standards) underdog- against the more aristocratic, handsome and intelligent Gore and Kerry.

 

People who are exceptionally pretty or handsome often think they are entitled to everything and have probably always had people giving them a break, so they just expect it. It is not a big deal for them not to return a favour or renege on a debt. Unattractive people probably have a harder time getting things in life, getting people to do things for them. So, when someone finally gives them a break, they’re more likely to appreciate it and feel a stronger need to prove they are worthy of the kindness.

 

Carrying on from where we left off on Al Gore, with his largely expanded girth; he is now human in both his appearance and his presentation style. We seem to like Al Gore much better now that he’s not quite so perfect. Gail Sheehy in a New York Times editorial titled ” Flawless, But Never Quite Loved “, said perfection was Al Gore’s Achilles Heel: he lacks glaring flaws, no dark past, no drunken parent or dubious paternity, no private demons, no cheating at Harvard, no bad-boy brother or left-wing wife…how is the poor man to compete in the Politics of Personal Biography!

 

The quizzical universal appeal of the ‘ ugly ‘ can be best attributed to ET: The Extra Terrestrial( A Steven Spielberg runaway hit) where the wrinkle-faced, hairless, bug-eyed alien waddled into the hearts and minds of millions. The fictional alien with an appearance that Spielberg called ” something that only a mother would love ” was seemingly everywhere in pop culture- from commercials and public service announcements to books and songs.

 

At a time when when stoic journalists with pretty faces and perfectly sculpted ‘helmet hair’ graced news and talk shows, an over-weight, coif-challenged, African-American woman aka Oprah Winfrey with extra weight, non-conformist hair  and folksy style helped her propel to one of the media icons not just in America but around the world.

 

There is a field of anthropology called ‘ human universals ‘: things that people across cultures find universally appealing or comforting. According to researchers, a preference for physical flaws is one of those human universals. If Oprah were to be thin and runway-model gorgeous when her show first debuted, viewers would not have had an instant and deep connection to her.

 

When Mickey Mouse first debuted back in 1928, his face and limbs were in proportion to the rest of his body( a symmetrical appearance is considered unappealing to the mass consciousness). But along 1947, just as the famous rodent’s personality was evolving to become more adult and well-mannered- his appearances became more juvenile. Artists at Walt Disney, enlarged his head, exaggerated his ears and also lengthened his pants from above the knee to down to his shoes. Mickey’s evolution has made him more infant like in his appearance and, therefore, more vulnerable. What is vulnerable is lovable.

 

” Beauty is only skin deep but ugly goes all the way down to the bone“.

 

When we are having a collective crisis of confidence, we always resort to the comforting allure of the less-than-perfect– whether it is in the form of a leader, a teddy bear, Mickey Mouse or an Oprah.

 

Our distrust for perfection or things that come too easily continues to permeate our manufacturing systems too. We have the sophisticated technology to produce products with zero defects but our primal, anthropoligical and biological conditioning prevent us from buying into them. Perfection, after all, is the domain of those who oppress.

 

According to Carleton Coon, a Harvard educated physical anthropologist said ” problem-solving by trial and error ” is one quality all cultures have in common. Because humans historically have had to make several tries to get something right, it ‘ feels right ‘ when there are initial failures.

 

So, conspicuous imperfections anyone?

 

 

 

If you are anywhere on a high traffic density road in any modern city today, you would be subject to billboards and digital advertising signages screaming 25 to 70% off( or its equivalent underpricing bribe), irrespective of the time of the year, regardless of category that the brand is struggling, surviving, thriving or flourishing in.

 

In my opinion, this is a sure fire way to establish that the highly competent and skilled branding and marketing professionals behind such campaigns are downright lazy. Pardon my saying so. Low price is the last refuge of leadership that doesn’t have the guts to make a great product and tell a true story to the right people.

 

Not all customers are made equal. Some customers want to pay more than others, and some customers want to get more—of something—than others. That is an established default. The questions(here are a few) to ask might be:

 

” Are you selling to the wrong people? ”

 

” Is your marketing message incorrect? ”

 

” Your costs of acquiring a new customer are more than that customer is worth? ” 

 

” Your supply chain may be undeveloped? ”

 

” What are you outsourcing? Is the time and money you spend on every step rewarded by the customer you serve? ”

 

” Is there a mismatch between your story and the worldview of those you seek to serve? ”

 

” Are you overspending or underspending on marketing? ” – (often, it’s the under spenders that are in real trouble!)

” Because you are already in Red Ocean territory and your product or service is not remarkable ”

 

” Are you misrepresenting or over representing when you are communicating ? ”

 

” Is your advertising or brand communication instantly forgettable? ”

 

” Is it because your product doesn’t earn traction with your customers, they wouldn’t miss you if you were gone–and the substitutes are easy ? “.

 

” Even though you’re trying hard, you’re being selfish, focusing on your needs instead of having empathy for those you seek to serve. The shoe is not on the other foot “?

 

” Is it the people you seek to serve don’t trust you? ”

 

” Are you focusing on the wrong channels to tell your story? Just because social media is fun, it does not mean it works! ”

 

” Are your people motivated or trained to be efficient?Because people do what they want, and they respond to training and respect and opportunity!”

 

” Are you being reactive, doing what the market tells you instead of bending the market in the direction you want it to go? ”

 

A lot of what is claimed to be marketing is exactly what it is NOT. Often times, when faced with problems like these, we wield the megaphone and start shouting and hyping, cutting promotional corners instead of doing the hard, deep, meaningful work of understanding what we make, how we make it, and who do we make it for. But the relief is that once you understand what is broken( in the long list of questions above), you can fix it.

 

As it is said, ” Don’t find customers for your product or services. Find products and services for your customers “. More on this at https://www.brandknewmag.com/dont-find-customers-for-your-products-find-products-for-your-customers/

 

It is said that ideas are aplenty but ideas without action are regrets.

 

Don’t be bothered about the fact that your ideas will be used or stolen. If you are part of a creative and branding agency like ours ie ISD Global, you will face this all the time. Even if you are not, that remains a distinct possibility.

 

Many blunders in business are through inability or an unwillingness to adopt new ideas. We have seen many a success turn to failure also, because the thought which should be trained on big things is cluttered up with the burdensome detail of little things.

 

History is littered with instances where a market leader couldn’t see the potential in a rivaling idea. Showing up and shipping out our ideas is the least we can do. For a stunning and shocking understanding of the game changing ideas that were let go by big leaders, take a look at this blog https://www.sureshdinakaran.com/blog/2024/02/25/leaders-big-ideas-and-their-we-shall-let-this-pass-mindset/

 

As there are misanthropists or haters of men, so also are there misologists, or haters of ideas– Plato

 

 

The business world has launched a new quest. The ancient pursuits- for capital, for raw materials, for process technology- remain eternal. But now business seeks a new advantage- delicate and dangerous, and absolutely vital- the creativity advantage as a conduit to sustainable, cumulative, competitive advantage.

 

Way back in 1995, IBM acquired Lotus for US $ 3.5 Billion. Surely it was not just to get its software. Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, and David Geffen did not estimate DreamWorks worth at US$ 2.7 Billion based on traditional capital assets- it had none. These companies bank their bottom line on fresh talent and new ideas-on the creative potential of their employees.

 

To survive and triumph in today’s marketplace, all organizations be it airlines, accounting firms, shoe makers, retail chains, software developers- must make creativity their number one priority.

 

Creativity has both a vocabulary and a grammar. It is both an art and a discipline. The jazz jam session is a brilliant metaphor for understanding creativity. You understand how a group of musicians can use their ideas to create new possibilities by challenging each other’s imagination while creating collective impact and individual brilliance. At once unpredictable and harmonious. Stimulating creativity is a process that can be observed, analysed, understood, replicated, taught and managed. Contrary to popular perception. Furthermore, managers must control without controlling and direct without directing and you will see that it is not as senseless as it sounds. Managers can’t demand creativity  any more than they can order growth from a flower.

 

Like jazz, creativity has its vocabulary and conventions. As in jazz too, its paradoxes create tensions. It demands free expressiveness and disciplined self-control, solitude in a crowded room, acceptance and defiance, serendipity and direction.

 

All this is risky. Unavoidably so. When the alto sax player starts a solo, he doesn’t know where he is going, let alone how far and for how long. His inner voice- to which the music, the other musicians, the setting and ambience and even the listeners contribute- directs him. That’s the nature of improvisation and companies that aren’t willing to take its risks are not long for this fluid, protean, constantly challenging world. Companies that shun creative risks may be undercut by competitors not only with better products and services, but also with better processes and ways of perceiving new opportunities. Escaping the stagnation of the status quo, of the risk free life, is part of the exhilaration of jamming-in music and in business.

 

In jazz-and in business- the improvisational style derives its power from the way it juxtaposes certain vital human tensions or paradoxes. Here’s a partial list, in no particular order:

 

• The established( tradition, powers that be, status quo) in tension with the new
• The need for form in tension with the drive for openness
• Critical norms and standards in tension with the need to experiment
•  The security of the familiar in tension with the lure of the unknown
• Responsiveness(responsibility) to the group in tension with individual expressiveness
• Discipline in tension with freedom
• Power in tension with desire
• Established theory in tension with persistent experimentation
• Expertise in tension with freshness, naivete

 

The choice is stark. Create or fail.