Posts Tagged ‘scalable’
I haven’t blogged in any great depth about Scrmblr (’scrambler’), so thought it was about time.
Scrmblr is a global network of content producers (Scrmblrs) who create anti-ads (Scrmbls).
Marketing used to be about advertising, but advertising is often expensive, fake and dumb. What remains important is the act of telling stories about the things we trade – stories that sell and stories that spread.
Scrmblr gives power to the people – the talented people of the world, enabling creators of great content to reap fair rewards, while enabling organisations who couldn’t dream of affording video ads the opportunity to air Scrmbls (much better!). Cheaper, better, faster.
Scrmblr removes the unfair, prohibitive supply-chain mess that sits between talented people who make stuff and people who buy great stuff.
Fair trade.
The Scrmblr website has just been launched here. 20% of profits will be donated to microcredit projects, in a drive to do something good. The first scrmbl created was for UK charity ShelterBox, by Tel Aviv scrmblr Danny Aronson.
Scrmblr already has a presence in UK, ISA, Israel and Canada… and is on the lookout for more talent (filmmakers, producers, animators, designers, creatives etc).

Let’s compare for a moment. You can compare in terms of pretty much anything: efficiency, effectiveness, happiness…
Some brief examples:
Communications
C: Spread from the top down
T: Spread from anywhere to everywhere, via the centre
Growth
C: Recruit from the top, hiring below
T: Recruit from anywhere, hiring everywhere
Innovation
C: Creation from the bottom, managed from the top
T: Creation from everywhere, no management needed
Bliss
C: Everyone spends their time inside the company’s expensive box, developing ideas with others from the same company
T: Everyone works from anywhere, developing ideas with a diverse range of people they like to spend time with
I know which one I’d rather join, or start.
Most people at some point question what they’re doing… where their life is going… whether they’ve achieved enough or made the correct choices. Whether they should be playing this game or jacking it all in for a beach shack. This post is for all you guys.
I, for one, sometimes get sick of the sound of my own voice, repeating the stuff of ‘those who get it’ – as if it’s still brand new. As long as there are ‘those who don’t get it’, perhaps we still feel good about ourselves. Or maybe we’re all secretly afraid we’ve wasted our lives on a load of old bollox?
Here are a few typical state-of-play regurgitations:
- Markets are more competitive and we have more choice (long tail etc)
- Broadcast is crumbling as we filter the noise
- Marketers increasingly have to justify their budgets (and silver bullet solutions fail to deliver on promises)
- Markets are conversations
- Word of mouth recommendation is the biggest influence on purchase decisions
- People no longer trust authorities, institutions and advertising
- There has been a power shift from brand to consumer
- 360 degree, relevant, targeted, tailored, personalised blah blah
etc etc
We bang on about social media and word of mouth as if they’re actually marketing disciplines. Word of mouth is not a marketing discipline. Social media is not a marketing channel.
The reality is, they’re just more of the same thing humans – people of the world – have always done… more communicating. Not rocket science. We’ve always done it and we always will – with increasing speed and ease via technology, in our evermore fluid, diverse societies.
Unless we’re all gagged, of course we’ll share things and recommend stuff. It isn’t a phenomenon; and it doesn’t even necessarily have to be ‘harnessed’.
Okay, so there’s a general coming-around to the idea that advertising is dead. Market research is also balancing on a credibility knife-edge. Back in 2005, Simon Clift, CMO and Group VP of Unilever’s Personal Care Division, said, ‘I just don’t believe in predictive research. And we don’t use it.’
No surprise there, when you think about it. We ask people what they think, what they do and what they’ll do in the future – and take their answers as if they’re objective truths. We extract wads from brands knowing full well that’s somewhat counter to common sense, particularly as we’re in the futurist half-arsed scientist’s club and we know better.
Perhaps we need to ‘fess up and admit the truth… i.e. that we don’t have a clue. Our predictions are based precariously on platonicity. We suffer from confirmation bias, historical bias and more or less any bias you can think of that makes us think we will be and were right.
If you consider the kind of industry thinking and activity we had in the past; the kind we have in the present; and the kind we futurists have about the future… how’s about we skip all that – skip the curve – and start making things happen in line with the future beyond our current prevarications.

Maybe it’s worth considering that marketing is dead (or at least will/could/should be). That business models are people-driven. That nobody wants to have a conversation with a Brand. That there are no Us and Them divides between brands and consumers – we’re all just people. That scalability comes from putting the people of the world in control. That the complex supply chains which leverage the hoarding of knowledge for big bucks are no longer needed nor wanted (we see them falling by the day). That we marketers are no longer needed nor wanted. As individuals, we’ll control our incoming and outgoing communications ourselves; in a punk-capitalist-come-communist society (if you feel the need to name it). The knowledge of the people of the world is out there and it’s spreadable, mashable, monetizable and free. So many of our positions are no longer relevant. What a bloody fantastic opportunity!
I just spotted this article from last year, in which Michael Grade, ITV’s Exec Chairman and ex BBC Chairman slates Joost and YouTube, labeling them ‘content parasites’.
He said, “The day that Google or Joost or any of these people start investing £1bn a year in UK content is the day I’ll start to be worried.”
Duh! I’ll bet those cash wad buffers in his big shiny office don’t feel so protective now. Sound proof, maybe, but not protective. Forgetting the cumulative talent of the people of the world perhaps? Err… completely forgetting the whole essence of scalability and the power to organise without organisations and their £1bn budgets??? (I hear Yahoo’s Chief Exec made a similar daft remark at a conference the other day – they’re all screwed).
Meanwhile, more recently, ITV reported a loss of £2.7 bn for 2008 and subsequent staff cull. And what do you know, Google’s revenues exceeded those of ITV.
A fundamental law of physics (in one formulation) states that left to itself any closed system will always change towards a state of equilibrium from which no further change is possible. One example is swinging a pendulum… if you hold it up to one side it’ll be in a state of extreme disequilibrium, then as you let go and it swings back and forth, gradually losing energy, it’ll come to a standstill.
Other examples include many media agencies and advertising agencies. You know why.
Someone said to me today, ‘but we need to prove the ROI – how much is it [implementing a vision that gives power to the people, to cut a long story short] going to cost and what will the return will be? How do we show that listening to the customer has better ROI than direct marketing?’
Errr…. I’m not even going to answer that.
Our obsession with plotting loads of numbers in loads of rows in so-called forecasts, that ‘demonstrate ROI’ may be a comfort blanket for some, but are forecasts ever accurate or meaningful? If we look back at them later (which we seldom do thoroughly, because they’re so irrelevant and unfriendly) we’ll be astonished (or not) at how far off the mark we were.
Way too many business models set themselves up for equilibrium. A scalable business model should be fractal in nature… infinitely scalable, independent of any company’s resources. You should be able to zoom all the way in… or all the way out… and see a repeatability, recursiveness and simplicity. We should focus on setting ourselves up to leverage the unforeseen opportunities, rather than attempting to predict the unpredictable and produce reams of comfort crap on autopilot.

The rotary motion of a harmonograph produces a series of complex drawings influenced by relative frequency, amplitude and direction.
Brands should communicate with a harmonic balance between relative frequency (WHEN… don’t interrupt), amplitude (WHAT…loudness…don’t shout / broadcast) and direction (WHERE… targeting, permission).
Companies should seek to produce beautiful pictures… not chaos (disharmony / dissonance). Business models that can be boiled down to a simple, beautiful picture tend to have inherent scalability.
Everything has a natural frequency of vibration, i.e. its resonant frequency. For instance a glass smashes when a sound causes a vibration that matches its resonant frequency; or the millennium bridge sways like hell when the pedestrians wobble it at it’s resonance frequency.
Brands are trying to find consumers’ resonant frequencies. So when a company gets it right, they really vibrate (?!) that individual and forge a powerful emotional connection (lovemark).
BUT… we humans are surprising. We resonate at unexpected frequencies (for instance a middle aged business man might listen to hip-hop, or conversely a teenage rapper might be a Mozart fan, or a fitness trainer smoke fags and snort cocaine, or a coke addict worry about taking aspirin).
Not only that, but resonant objects (i.e. musical instruments, or people in this instance) usually have more than one resonant frequency (harmonics). We will easily vibrate at those frequencies, and vibrate less strongly at others. We will “pick out” our resonant frequency, in effect filtering out all frequencies other than our resonance. We’re bombarded with so many marketing messages that we’re helluva picky about what we listen to. If it doesn’t resonate with us, it’s just white noise, just more boring intrusive marketing messaging crap that we don’t want or care about.
Get it right (in an integrated way) and a brand can resonate with us on heaps of different levels, through various channels, forming a compelling experience.
So don’t do boring, presumptuous marketing. Move and shake markets and emanate good vibes to each individual customer.
It’s like clubbing. For some people, the clubbing experience resonates on various levels: thumping tunes at 140 beats per minute, ecstasy, clan mentality, laser lighting, physicality… and it makes them buzz and dance like hell. Or rich foodies: the dining experience resonates on various levels: their helicopter landing outside the restaurant in Lourges, the gold-plated oversized gate posts, the whiff of truffle oil and foie gras… the wine waiter talking through appropriate selections, the handshake from the proprietor over dessert…
Tailor the experience, but NOT prescriptively. Provide tools, environments, useful and interesting stuff. Then GET OUT OF THE WAY, hand over the reigns and let the people of the world do what they want. And what d’ya know… scalable marketing, unlimited by your resources.
Recent Comments