PAGE
Discuss
Jan 26th, 2012

London 1 New York 0

While the Western World becomes a safer place, some places are safer than others.

It's now better to have a heart attack in London than New York – not because New York is a bad place but because the UK, and London in particular, is such a good place.

While so much written about the NHS is critical, the treatment of heart disease and heart attacks is a success story. Rates for the latter have fallen by 50% in the past twenty years. A joined up story of better primary and secondary care. Cardiac angioplasty – which was used to treat the 90–year–old Prince Phillip at Christmas – is now expertly and routinely done and not just for royalty but for everybody.

Something that now – even after Obama's health reforms – citizens of New York cannot take for granted.

1460
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Dec 15th, 2011

Stiff upper lip in the doctor's surgery

It's a well known fact that drivers on the motorway drive a lot better, and observe the speed limits, when they think they're being watched by the police. Indeed the police must often feel like the Queen at a parade ground. Everyone is putting on a show. Driving perfectly in a bubble around them.

 

And in healthcare the same can be observed. While the trauma patient and someone really sick may be taken to a hospital in an ambulance, the vast majority of consultations take place at the doctor’s practice or hospital consulting rooms.

 

This may give doctors a distorted picture of health. Quite literally, to go to the doctor is an effort and this may temporarily change not only the appearance of the sick but also their mood.

 

As Daniel Kahneman shows in his book ‘Fast and Slow thinking’ – when someone forces his face into a smile – by holding a pencil between top lip and nose – this releases the same endorphins that a real smile produces. Comedy is seen as funnier by those who are already smiling. They rate it higher. And similarly, when a patient goes out and faces the world, this commitment may actually make them feel capable of facing the world. So, temporarily they feel better.

 

Put this together with the widely held belief that doctors are over-worked and that patients are ‘wasting their time’(something we particularly feel with our ‘free’ NHS) and we are inclined to present the stiff upper lip – a picture of health that's far from the truth. The stoicism of patients during the doctors’ visit is often discussed in health forums for the chronically sick.

 

But now, some physicians are beginning to champion a new approach – putting patients at the centre of treatment.

 

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2011/07/11/richard–smith–a–short–history–of–patient–power/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/01/rupert–whitaker–urges–patient–power

 

In the endless march towards reforming health policy, we have lost the essential experience of a doctor visiting a patient. To see how a chronically sick patient copes day–to–day at home, maybe you have to see them at home? Or, at least, find out how they really get on at home?

 

Trials have shown that quantitative monitoring of their condition by patients with chronic diseases as they carry on their daily lives can lead to better outcomes than routine care without such monitoring. So more actively involving patients may very well be the right thing to do not only ethically, but also clinically.

1446
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Dec 5th, 2011

Whatever happened to the Ultimate Driving Machine?

BMW-picture.jpgWhen I came into the ad industry, a young account executive had three printable career goals: to work on a sexy account, to work in a sexy agency and to be promoted fast (which sometimes meant a sexy company car).

 

Some account execs managed to combine all three by working at WCRS on BMW and of course driving a 3 series – that most ubiquitous model.

 

Over the decades, painstakingly BMW has developed its not unattractive product into a major brand through brilliantly executed, iconic press advertising – masterfully steered by the agency and a succession of brilliant creative people.

 

In a benchmark IPA effectiveness case history, strategist Tim Broadbent proved that the intangible value of BMW in the UK had been raised above the non “Ultimate Driving Machine” markets to the tune of several billion Euros.

 

The gentle intelligence of the (mainly) press ads - each characterised by single-minded examples of the cars’ build quality - became creative award winners and persuaded the public to trade up from Ford to BMW as the badge of choice.

 

However in the past decade, slowly at first, the client appeared to lose faith in the brand’s desirability and, eventually, completely lost the plot.

 

The “Joy” campaign is not persuasion but exhortation (rather like the maxim that you cannot claim to be funny or stylish: you have to be funny or stylish). Not only does it break the spell of the desirability and intelligence of the brand, it assumes that we are not intelligent.

 

BMW - you have done a brilliant job in building your brand. Please don’t lose faith just because the economy is fragile. It’s not too late to reconnect with the brilliant property embodied in The Ultimate Driving Machine.

1439
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Dec 1st, 2011

Creators vs discoverers

We've had a bit of discussion at Seven Stones about the creative/science divide as, in order to create a successful healthcare advertising agency, we are ourselves a fair old jumble of the two. Look in one corner of the agency and you'll find a cell biologist trying to get their head around Pantone colours. Look in the other and there’s an art director tackling the latest MOA diagram for a biologic drug.

 

This was on my mind recently when I was reading a book on evolution by the philosopher Daniel Dennett called, Darwin's Dangerous Idea. He talks about a distinction between those that create and those that discover, i.e. Shakespeare created The Taming of the Shrew, while Newton discovered gravity.

 

It got me thinking: couldn’t creativity be defined as having the ability to observe more than what is just physically present? Is that not exactly what both Shakespeare and Newton were doing?

 

When I've taken creative writing classes, the teachers have a tendency to say things like "let the poem be what it wants to be" or "this is a story that wants to be told" as if these are things that have a mind of their own. Or as if they are things that are already out there waiting to be discovered.

 

What makes the difference between which things get created/discovered depends on what people choose to pursue. So if no one decides to write the story about how a fish managed to crash the stock market, then it will never be heard. It will just be left there, abandoned in the hypothetical ether.

 

Equally, if no one decided to work out the laws governing our planet, then when an apple falls from a tree and someone says how did that happen? we’d all just shrug our shoulders.

 

In the book, Dennett himself talks about the Library of Babel, a place where every possible combination of words and letters is stored in volumes of books – even ones that have just one-letter typos. Ultimately, however massive, there must be a finite number of ways of putting words together correctly and incorrectly. The same must be true of visual things too.

 

So, this leaves me wondering: do we ever really create? Are we not just constantly scratching the surface of an invisible realm of possibility, just as scientists scratch the surface of knowledge of the universe? And then, is making a distinction between creative people and discoverer people actually a bit useless?

1437
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Nov 30th, 2011

A bucketful of brains

Human beings are the most complex creatures on the planet.

 

I know it's hard to believe that you are surrounded by smart and knowledgeable beings on your daily commute as your fellow men push and elbow you to get on the train. Or to think that your boyfriend and his posse might be blessed with a higher intelligence as they scoff pizza and guzzle beer like starving primevals: "Me man, me hungry, me eat".

 

Understandably, you might think they have no brain at all. But, in fact, only a few primitive species such as sponges, jellyfish and starfish have no brain. We humans actually possess billions of neurons exerting centralised, sophisticated and purposeful control of our behaviour.

 

Take the process of decision–making. In a world of abundant choice, it is influenced by a whole host of internal and external factors. Collecting the external factors is relatively straightforward; there are, after all, many ways to gather the thoughts and views of individuals. Collecting the internal factors is rather more difficult. To do this, the current buzz is all around neuroscience.

 

Neuroscientific techniques involving, for example, electroencephalography, eye tracking, galvanic skin response and magnetic resonance imaging, may help us decipher human behaviour. However, methods such as these can be complicated and, as a result, expensive. Moreover, some have yet to be validated by any kind of evidence base.

 

At Strata Research, such is our belief in the value of uncovering the internal as well as the external factors that play a part in decision–making, we’ve spent the last four years developing and refining methodologies to make neuroscientific market research accessible, practical and affordable. Our brand of neuroscience is also backed–up by peer–reviewed data.

 

Using implicit association testing, which measures reaction times to a selection of stimuli, we can see if unconscious biases or associations exist. In combination with traditional research methods, this helps us more accurately gauge which brands people prefer and why – across a variety of different dimensions.

 

These are exciting times. We may be finally able to peel away some of the layers which dictate the way we make decisions and dig a little deeper into the way we really think.

1436
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Nov 23rd, 2011

Thinking, Fast and Slow at the RI

A recent lecture at the Royal Institution featured Daniel Kahneman discussing Thinking, Fast and Slow, the title of his new book. He had the audience enthralled in both how brilliant the human mind is but how difficult it is to pin down.

 

In 1974 he and Amos Tversky noticed that some associations are instant, as if programmed and learned (e.g. 2 + 2 = 4) whereas others require conscious thought, attention and effort (e.g. 17 x 24 = ?) and that there appears to be a fast as well as a slow system at work in the mind. But just as the right answers can be learned, so can wrong ones, and often are.

 

Kahneman and Tversky's work used puzzles to show that human beings often make errors and then repeat those errors through life. Because we want to avoid effort we look for the simplest explanation, the most intuitively right answer. So, unless we have a strong justification for questioning something, we tend to follow our instincts which arise in the fast system (system 1).

 

Our capacity to make judgements instantly is bewildering. Showing images of US presidential candidates for 1/10 of a second each – and then asking the public to rate them – provides a 70% accurate picture of actual presidential election results. First impressions are absurdly and ruinously powerful. Indeed, unless the feelings manifested in the fast system are challenged by the slow system (system 2), first impressions will be the impressions.

 

So, you might like the look of a car salesman and infer that he is a good person to buy from. However if you then find out he has a criminal record, system 2 takes over and rationally modifies the irrational bias you displayed.

 

This work by Kahneman is supported by the research conducted by the IPA on advertising effectiveness. Brands that develop powerful associations with communications via low involvement processing appear to be more effective than those that set out to create a conscious dialogue. It seems that when system 2 gets involved it is likely to interrogate in a way that doesn’t help the brand.

 

Moreover because the human mind is essentially lazy and avoids unnecessary work, attempting to get people to think about things that are not worth thinking about may actually be counter–productive. Do I really want to follow a cereal bar or skin cream on Twitter?

 

At the end of the lecture, Kahneman left the audience in no doubt. Desires arise in system 1 and are only interrogated in system 2 if needed. We do not simplistically act on our impulses. There's a checking system in place.

 

Earlier he'd made the point that human brains look for coherence more than they look for the truth. Which meant that we left the evening on a glorious knife edge: we know so much more but we still don’t know it all.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/1846140552

1449
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Creativity
Nov 17th, 2011

Rise of the robot

blogimage.jpg

 

Yesterday, a large box of gears, motors, soldering irons and circuit boards arrived. Today, we began to build a robot. We will call him Seve [sehvee] and he will be cool.

 

Once built, however, Seve will need a brain and our technical team here at Seven Stones have the task of bringing him to his senses and ratifying his independence. Clearly, this isn’t going to be a run–of–the–mill teambuilding activity for a healthcare advertising agency. However, it's a challenge and we’ll see where it takes us.

 

You see, Seve is really a Trojan horse. By asking our copywriters, designers and programmers to devise effective ways for Seve to see, hear, crawl and talk, we are asking them to explore themes and propositions completely outside their normal experience. It's a chance to offer wildly bizarre solutions and let their minds run further afield from the comfortable safety of ‘tried–and–tested’. We hope that Seve will become a walking, talking repository for creative thinking in a digital world.

 

We will discuss, design and develop a set of proprietary tools and software routines that will allow Seve to autonomously interact with his environment, respond to stimuli, recognise natural language and perform useful tasks. He probably won’t always do what he's meant to, but we will teach him our ways and he will be enlightened.

 

In the process we can hope to brush the dust off some undeveloped neurons and get them firing in a new direction. Ironically, it's that ability that separates us from mere robots.

 

Paul

1432
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Insight
Nov 16th, 2011

Mush room for improvement

I recently took part in a fungi identification course. We arrived early on a Sunday morning with our walking boots, sandwiches, enthusiasm and – very optimistically given the warm, dry weather – our collecting baskets. After ‘hunting’ for an hour we took our still-empty baskets back to the classroom and the instructor presented us with various specimens that he had ‘picked earlier’.

 

Our next task involved identifying the fungi using a flow chart and some reference books. This was far from simple. Was the stem spongy or was it brittle? Was the surface ‘brown’ or was it ‘yellowish–brown’? Why was I prepared to argue passionately that the spores were ‘grey’ yet the man sitting next to me insisted they were ‘grey–black.’

 

In the world of fungi the chanterelle has been described as one of the most ‘important and best edible mushrooms’ while the similar looking ‘false chanterelle’ results in gastrointestinal distress if eaten. Apparently one of the distinguishing features is an ‘egg yellow’ versus ‘more orange’ hue. Call me ‘risk averse’ but I’d prefer to base my chances of a having a gastro fest or gastric upset on firmer evidence!

 

Which brings us neatly back to communications. Commissioning expensive marketing campaigns involves risk. Which concept will be most successful? Which will deliver the greatest return on investment? These decisions have historically been based on the ‘firm evidence’ that is generated by asking people who have little or no marketing experience to judge different concepts on such abstract dimensions, as ‘tone’ or ‘impact’. Quite an odd thing to do really isn’t it?

 

But what are the alternatives? Well, one is neuroscience. Recently a lot has been written on the value of using neuroscience to measure the impact of a communication, as it captures unconscious reactions to stimuli and does not rely on conscious ‘verbal’ processing.

 

But perhaps we should also be more prepared to listen to those who ‘unconsciously know’. Experienced mushroom pickers appear to ‘just know’ which fungi to eat, and not because they are guessing, but because their experience has made it second nature. Is there room for more ‘unconscious knowing’ in business? Einstein said: “the intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honours the servant and has forgotten the gift”.

 

Have we, for totally understandable reasons, lost sight of our ‘unconscious knowing’ in business? Has a fear of failure led to over analysis? Is the ability to recognise a good thing when you see it – for no other reason than you have seen many in the past – no longer valued? And is it something that we should aim to bring back to the boardroom?

1424
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Nov 9th, 2011

We are all copywriters

I have heard it said that the first rule of copywriting is to get to know your product inside out. I recently had to write promotion for something, of which I have acquired in–depth knowledge over a period of 23 years: myself.

I've been looking for somewhere new to live, and for the last six weeks have been firing off emails 360° to persuade potential housemates that they might want to share their roof with me. Persuasion being what my job is all about, I had to become my own client. And I was a demanding one.

 

Anyone who's ever experienced a crossover between their professional skills and personal life will probably understand the pressure I felt. This is how I make my living; I should be better at this than anyone else. But as I continued, it occurred to me that copywriting skills make their way into everyone's life, regardless of their profession. Just as chefs are paid to work, everyone has to cook.

 

Writers like John Simmons passionately advocate that everyone should learn copywriting skills because most people will have to, at some point, use the written word to be persuasive at work. But it’s not just at work this skill is vital. What about the letter that got you the job in the first place? The afore mentioned house-hunting email? Or how about your online dating profile?

 

Sooner or later, we all have to pick up a pen and persuade someone that we are, quite simply, the best. So, in fact, we all have to become copywriters. Luckily, for most people, by the time they come to write, the product they're promoting is one they've already had plenty experience of.

 

Recommended reading:

 

John Simmons (2004) Dark Angels. London: Cyan Books.

 

Lindsay Camp (2007) Can I Change Your Mind? London: A & C Black.

1414
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Insight
Nov 8th, 2011

The person in the purchase

 

checkout.jpg

Why buy anything?

Why do people buy things? Why do they fork out some of their hard–earned cash to exchange it for something else?

This is the sort of question that is framed at such a general level of analysis that any answer to it might seem guaranteed to be unsatisfactory.

The answer might, for example, tend to be more philosophical than the practical. A deep reflection on human nature might follow, with all the inevitable loose ends such reflections entail. Even a more grounded answer might still end up being inconclusive. Think about it: in any number of different situations, any number of different people might have any number of different reasons for buying any number of different things. You could spend a lifetime exploring all the different possibilities.

 

Nonetheless, sometimes such a question can be given a partial answer that improves understanding. We try to do so here by introducing a key distinction, and by discussing some psychological research based on it.

 

Two types of reasons for buying

People can buy thing for two fundamental reasons: utilitarian and symbolic. The adjectives are fancy and high–falutin’. So let’s explain each in turn.

 

First, what is a utilitarian reason for buying something? Well, it’s the one you already know. All goods—which today we typically receive in exchange for money—have utility. And utility is what, in material terms, makes those goods “good”. Utility is what goods do for you, what you get out of them. For example: movies entertain you, motorcars transport you, and medicines make you better. This is so obvious it hardly bears mention. Indeed, utility might seem like the only reason to buy anything at all. What else is there to goods apart from the material benefits they provide?

 

Yet, the matter is more complex. People buy things for symbolic reasons too.

 

A big part of being human is living in a world imbued with meaning. Nothing we see merely is what it is: it also has implications. The flowers a wife receives from a husband sure smell nice; but they also signify love. The raise a boss gives a worker improves his financial standing; but it also tells him he is appreciated.

 

This lesson applies as much to the things we buy as to anything else.

 

Consider a movie or a motorcar. Certainly, they both provide material satisfactions. But they also carry additional meaning. For example, if you first kissed your romantic partner during a drive–in movie, then a CD of the movie you watched, or the original motorcar you kissed in, would mean something more beyond any utilitarian value they might have.

 

From scarce goods to social status

Now, let’s suppose I own either (a) some original film reels of the 1931 movie Dracula, featuring spooky Béla Legosi, or (b) a Bugatti Veyron, the most expensive motorcar in the world, currently retailing at over £1,000,000. What implications would this have?

 

Well, for a start, it would probably distinguish me from you. Original film reels or Bugatti Veyrons are in scarce supply: only a few people can own them. Moreover, to the extent that society says such goods are desirable, owning them would positively distinguish me from you. I would enjoy the prestige and glamour of owning such fine things; you wouldn’t.

 

But the broadest implication would be this: being able to positively distinguish myself from you, my social status would increase relative to yours. Having more than you, I would stand taller. It is almost as if the properties of my possessions would rub off on me. “I” would become more special and desirable by extension. As the American psychologist William James noted over a century ago, “A man’s Self is the sum total of all that he CAN call his, not only his body and his psychic powers, but his clothes and his house […] his lands, and yacht and bank–account”.

 

Thus, we may conclude that people buy goods, not just for utilitarian reasons, not just to enjoy them. They also buy them for symbolic reasons, and for one in particular: to positively distinguish themselves from other people, and thereby enhance their social status.

 

From status–seeking to narcissistic needs

At one level, everyone wants to enhance their social status. It’s as natural for people to aspire upwards as it is for a plant to grow skywards. Hence, everyone has the potential to buy goods for symbolic as well as utilitarian reasons. Certainly, that iPad 2 features many cool apps; but owning one makes you look cool too.

 

Yet people differ. Some are more concerned with social status, some less. By extension, might some people also be more concerned buying goods for symbolic reasons than others? Seven Stones’ consultant psychologist, Dr. Aiden P. Gregg, recently conducted research into this very question.

 

Dr. Gregg began by measuring people’s narcissism. In common parlance, narcissism is the quality of being in love with oneself. The scientific definition expands upon the idea. In particular, narcissists like how they look; tend to show off; see themselves as superior; treasure independence; like exercising authority; often manipulate others; and have a stronger sense of entitlement.

 

Importantly, narcissism is a matter of degree. You can be completely narcissistic, completely un–narcissistic, and everything in between. For the sake of brevity, we will use to the word “narcissist” to describe someone relatively high on this personality trait.

 

Prior research has shown that narcissists are more concerned with agency—achieving important goals and getting ahead in life—than they are with communion—having fulfilling relationships and getting along with others. In other words, narcissists value status over belonging. Accordingly, it seems plausible that narcissists might be especially likely to buy consumer products to promote their status by positively distinguishing themselves from others.

 

Dr. Gregg and colleagues began their research by having a sample participants list some of their prized personal possessions. Next, they had them guess how many other people also owned them. As predicted, narcissists guessed that fewer other people did. This might have been true; or it might have been just their perception. Either way, the impression that fewer people owned their prized perceptions would have helped narcissists to positively distinguish themselves from others in their own minds.

 

But what about products narcissists don’t yet own? Dr. Gregg and colleagues also found that narcissists, unlike non–narcissists, displayed an interest in acquiring consumer goods that help to distinguish them from other people.

 

In one study, for example, narcissists showed greater interest in a fictitious “Just for You” brand of dress shirts, which they could customise to their taste. In another study, participants were given the option of choosing between two iPod accessories of equal value: a generic gift coupon for iTunes, or a leather case with their letters engraved. Narcissists were more likely to choose the latter option. In a final pair of studies, all participants were shown the same watch, but some were informed it was part of an exclusive limited edition, whereas others were informed that plenty of watches were available. Whether buying for themselves or for someone else, narcissists indicated they were willing to pay more for the limited edition watch; non–narcissists, in contrast, were not.

 

Thus, the empirical evidence bears out initial suspicions. Narcissists—the sorts of people who are especially concerned with status—are more interested in products that permit them to positively distinguish themselves from others.

 

As well providing theoretical insight, these research findings have a practical benefit. They pin down a key personality trait that sellers could use to predict who would be inclined to buy more distinctive products.

 

From narcissistic needs to favoured pharmaceuticals

Earlier, we gave examples of scarce goods from the world of movies and motorcars. Now it is the turn of medicine.

 

More specifically, the idea that narcissism increases interest in distinctive products has at least two applications in pharmaceutical market research. First, it can be used to help predict the relative likelihood of using branded versus generic drugs. Second, it can be used to help predict the relative likelihood of adopting new drugs versus sticking with established ones.

 

Much marketing research is devoted to measuring brand equity and much advertising to promoting it. However, consider any brand. One of its primary functions is simply to distinguish a product. A brand name, first and foremost, serves to convey that a product is different from its generic version or from competing brands. Indeed, the very presence of brand implies that a product is positively distinctive compared to its generic version—why else would it be specially named? Hence, status–conscious narcissists should particularly tend to prefer branded drugs over generic drugs. For them, a brand is not merely a cue to product quality, a sign that it will satisfactorily fulfil its utilitarian function; it is also a cue to product distinctiveness, a sign that it will symbolically enhance their social status. It follows that more narcissistic physicians should tend to prescribe, and more narcissistic consumers to take, branded as opposed to generic drugs. Furthermore, narcissists should be more sensitive to differences in equity between rival brands of drugs. Again, narcissists concern is not only with what a drug can do, but also with what it means. Using a drug with a better brand distinguishes them positively from others.

 

Now consider a new drug that comes on the market. Most likely, it imparts some utilitarian benefit. It probably beats the competition either in efficacy, safety, or tolerability. However, a new drug also confers a symbolic benefit. It is distinctive simply in virtue of being new. Hence, someone who prescribes or takes a new drug can distinguish themselves from the crowd. Accordingly, narcissists should be especially liable to embrace a new drug, be they physicians or consumers.

 

Of course, other considerations apply. For example, all else equal a new drug will be regarded as a riskier bet than a tried–and–trusted one. That too would influence the likelihood of adopting new drugs earlier. But narcissists are also known for courting risk, for being open to new possibilities. This is an additional reason why narcissists would be typical early–adopters.

 

To close, a methodological question: how could one determine whether a physician is higher or lower in narcissism, as means of better predicting who would prefer branded drugs and who would adopt new drugs earlier? Well, there are number of ways. First, there are standard and well–validated questions one can ask in over the phone interviews. If these are deemed too direct, there are other options. For example, an interviewer could casually enquire about an interviewee’s tastes in food, entertainment, and travel. If these are sophisticated and exclusive, then narcissism might be indicated. Third, there are often subtle signs an interviewer can pick up. A meticulous appearance, and designer clothes, would be one tell–tale sign of a narcissist.

 

Summary

People buy things not only for utilitarian reasons, but also for symbolic ones. That is, people buy products, not only for the material benefits they provide, but also because they help to distinguish them from other people, something that ultimately enhances social status. Research shows that narcissists are particularly likely to buy products for just this reason. Armed with this insight, market researchers can better predict who will buy what. For example, they can plausibly infer that narcissistic consumers would tend to prefer branded drugs, and that narcissistic physicians would tend to be early–adopters of new drugs.

 

References

Campbell, W. K. & Foster, J. D. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In C. Sedikides & S. Spencer (Eds.), Frontiers in social psychology: The self (pp. 115–138). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

 

 

Campbell, W. K., Goodie, A. S., & Foster, J. D. (2004). Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 297–311.

 

Lee, S., Gregg, A. P., & Park, S. (under review). The person in the purchase: Narcissistic consumers prefer products that distinguish them. Journal of Consumer Psychology.

 

Sedikides, C., Gregg, A. P., Cisek, S., & Hart, C. M. (2007). The I that buys: Narcissists as consumers. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17, 254–257.

1416
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by Julian on Nov 22nd, 2011
  • I really like this article - I'd read the utility/display brand before but I'd never read about the narcissistic individual and display and its meaning, particularly for highly premium and rare brands. We've all been aware of the narcissistic tendencies of art collectors who feel special denying the world a Picasso or Monet but the idea that this operates at the level of consumer brands is a fascinating insight. But beware. Narcissists are not always shallow. Indeed one of the wealthiest men I have ever met wore clapped out Docksides and old sailing trousers - to meetings with his client, one of the world's most prestigious companies - which he handled. He drove a conspicuously old car. He knew how wealthy he was and enjoyed playing a game that he was a hard working, somewhat working class, ordinary bloke. Of course we all knew that he was absolutely in charge: the alpha male who'd crush people who did not immediately spot that he was the man to be reckoned with. He looked a shambles but was anything but?
More
PAGE
Shaving
Nov 2nd, 2011

Movember...

Here at Seven Stones we aren't shy of competition or a challenge; we've had bake–off's, a chilli–off, quiz–offs, a painting–off, a pumpkin carving–off, a horror movie–off . . . you name it we’ve challenged it.

 

Once again, the boys at Seven Stones have taken the ‘anything you can do I can do better’ approach and embraced the Movember challenge by putting their facial hair follicles to the test in a competition to grow the most outrageous moustache during the month of November.

 

Yesterday the boys ditched their rugged Russell Brand/John Lennon'esque beards for a smooth clean–shaven face and I can't say it wasn’t without trauma. Even I know that you can't expect a cut–free face if you're using a blunt razor.

 

Nevertheless, the boys grinned and bearded it and have re–emerged as ‘Mo Bros’ to groom, trim and style their way into the moustachery hall of fame. Nothing here is without cause – their facial masterpieces are aimed at prompting both private and public discussion around the often ignored issue of men's health, in particular, raising awareness of prostate and testicular cancer.

 

We're raising money for The Prostate Cancer Charity and The Institute of Cancer Research. If you'd like to help us, please go to: https://www.movember.com/uk/donate/your-details/team_id/330020 and keep an eye out for our ever growing face furniture!

 

The girls at Seven Stones will be playing their part too. We'll be supporting them every hair of the way.

 

www.movember.com/uk

1398
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Thought-provoking
Oct 31st, 2011

Overheads

The United Nations has named October 31st as the symbolic "7 Billion People Day". Is that a cause for celebration or concern? Nobody, of course, can predict precisely when that landmark will be achieved (if it can be called an achievement) but somewhere on earth very soon the cry of a new-born child will signal the 7,000,000,000th living person[1]. The pace of change is quickening. In 1800 the world’s population stood at 1 billion people and as little as 50 years ago it was still only 3 billion. Our population has more than doubled in the last half century.

 

Should it concern us? We live in a rich, privileged country with abundant resources and still have a little wriggle room around the belts. Also, western nations are generally bucking the rapid growth trends seen in developing and newly industrialised nations and having fewer children. However I don’t think we can insulate ourselves altogether from the consequences of global population growth. A meteorologist will tell you that areas of high pressure bring changing winds into adjacent areas of low pressure and sometimes they bring storms too!

 

In the UK we each account for many times our 1/7,000,000,000th share of the world's available resources. Economic, environmental and migratory pressures will inevitably alter our way of life, and with less than 1% of the world’s fresh water supply being available for direct human use[2], we shouldn't be complacent. A hydrologist will tell you that the wells are taking longer to replenish.

 

By 2050 the global population will reach 9 billion people. Two billion extra people to nourish, clothe, house, employ, entertain, educate and medicate. A businessman will tell you that growth isn't sustainable unless opportunity goes hand in hand with productivity. But if the new recruits, via their actions or ours, can only consume but not contribute, what will be the net result?

 

Where do you fit into all this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15391515

 

Paul

 

1. http://populationmatters.org/

 

2. http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/freshwater_supply/freshwater.html

1397
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discussion
Oct 28th, 2011

Mind the gap

mind_the_gap.jpgDuring the 1980s our industry got a bad name for persuading clients that television advertising was a panacea. However hopeless the business problem “TV would fix it”.

 

Jimmy Saville himself fronted a campaign for InterCity at a time of record problems on the railways. This is the age of the train the campaign dishonestly sang.

 

The gap between the platform and the train was matched by that between the claim and the reality. And the public spotted it.

 

Thirty years on, we have learned that it is better to under claim and over deliver.

 

Bring people to your brand because you have a distinctive tone of voice and because you make your brand emotionally engaging. Let the public discover the product. They will know.

 

But perhaps we’ve gone a little too far in this direction?

 

For years I have been attracted to Waitrose food and Sainsbury’s prices. So when Morrisons launched their populist TV campaign with Richard Hammond and Denise Van Outen, I didn’t realise it was for me.

 

Until yesterday.

 

I went to a Morrisons in St Albans. Not only did it appear better value than Sainsbury, but I thought some of their fresh produce was in a different league to that at Waitrose. Hand–cut Parma ham at £19 a kilo. The best squid I’ve seen this side of Barcelona. Beetroot with all its leaves on, as if freshly dug–up from the allotment.

 

My question is whether their advertising actually lives up to the product?

1396
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by Paul on Nov 1st, 2011
  • Maybe you thought "it wasn't for you" because you had a preconceived idea of the quality of the brand. It takes a special TV ad to break down strong prejudices for or against something.
More
PAGE
Discuss
Oct 24th, 2011

The loss of innocence

Last night I lost my innocence.

 

I was peacefully absorbed in Downton Abbey, grieving for the heroine mistreated by the nasty self-made tycoon, when the unspeakable happened.

 

There it was in the ad break – a shabby ad for Innocent orange juice talking at me like it was the 1980s man from Del Monte. To add insult to injury, it was followed by an Innocent smoothie ad which inelegantly explained how it was packed full of fruit, the bottle shaped pile of berries shimmering in a cheap video haze.

 

Within the space of two minutes I had lost hope for the heroine uniting with the injured war hero, and seen my favourite brand of the recent past air ads lacking any trace of inspiration. It shouldn't happen to the local co–op shop's own label, let alone a market-leading premium brand.

 

The founders of Innocent were once advertising professionals. Who persuaded them to produce cheap and nasty ads? Who forgot that the unspoken elements of communication can do so much to either support or undermine the status of a brand leader? Customers may not consciously analyse production values. But, as an old sherry ad once put it, they instinctively know when something isn't right.

 

Innocent's success was underpinned by a distinctive, cheeky tone of voice. It was a brand with principles, a brand held with affection. The company's majority share holder may now be Coca Cola, but if I was marketing over at Fruit Towers these are elements of the brand I wouldn't mess with.

 

Please can I have my innocence back?

1393
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by kirstoid on Nov 29th, 2011
  • People don’t buy Innocent because their smoothies taste better than supermarket own brands. They buy it because it’s Innocent. And they want it. There’s no point trying to rationalise orange juice. When I first got my job I picked up all these old fashioned books on advertising. What they said, I think went something like ‘explain the features, demonstrate the benefits.’ How much of advertising fits into this today? Innocent recognised that they wouldn’t sell smoothies by telling people that theirs were the best, the best tasting, the best ingredients. As Dan Germain himself says, “There’s no point telling people ‘we only use the finest blueberries’. They either know that or they don’t care. Or both.” Now, as they bang on about the world’s finest oranges, have they lost sight of their own beliefs?
  • Posted by julian C on Oct 26th, 2011
  • Paul Watzlawick, the Austrian philosopher, talked about all communication comprising two things: relationship and content. In this case Innocent shows that its relationship with us - previously based on charm and wit - has moved clearly into the realm of 'salesmanship' and naturally we don't like that. Moreover the content - messages about the way oranges are grown - are neither interesting nor fresh and original. So they shatter the brand's trust. I agree, we all feel a little let down. When a brand adopts a different personality and appears to do so for reasons of self interest, it's not an attractive revelation.
More
PAGE
Discuss
Oct 20th, 2011

Elementary principles

What does particle physics have to do with advertising? I expect it's a question you’ve often heard and I think I'm close to answering it.

 

I went to two lectures recently. The first of them on advertising theory (here at Seven Stones) explored whether there is an underlying scientific method, as some have proposed, that can increase the likelihood of success of a new campaign. Many people over the years have put forward detailed theories, created lofty acronyms and supposedly 'cracked the code' of successful advertising. Each of them in turn has been supplanted by a newer, more elegant theory accompanied with the firm claim that this time it really works. The substance of the lecture was that human beings, however, are emotional and unpredictable. Therefore, cold hard sets of rules and procedures can never really anticipate human whims and obstinacy.

 

Later the same day, I went around the corner to the Royal Institute and sat in the lecture theatre where scientists such as Michael Faraday, Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins have presented their thoughts. The night's lecture was on the work of the Large Hadron Collider team at CERN. In just over one hour, Dr Tara Shears attempted to summarise fundamental particle physics! We crashed through the head-spinning world of muons, gluons, up-quarks and leptons as an introduction before finding out why the Standard Model* isn’t as Grand as it could be.

 

Scientists think they know what makes the universe work, they just can’t find any evidence that it exists. So they’re betting the bank on the LHC finding the elusive Higgs–boson**. This elementary particle is mathematically predicted by the Standard Model but is evidentially unknown and yet it's what makes matter matter. Then there's the unknown unknowns that no-one knows about yet – all of the stuff that physicists have evidence for accounts for only 4% of the entire universe. Does it really matter (or even anti–matter)?

 

So, to answer my initial question: In advertising, as in particle physics, it seems there are too many unknowns and too many variables to be able to proclaim a Grand Unified Theory just yet. Human beings are the Higgs-boson's of the consumer world. We know they’re out there making important decisions, we just can't fathom how they work or why they do weird things. As ever, we don’t know what we don't know.

 

* http://user.web.cern.ch/public/en/Science/StandardModel-en.html

 

** http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14596367

 

Paul

1392
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Reflection
Oct 19th, 2011

New or old?

Steve Jobs once said “death is life's greatest invention”. What he was referring to was the positive value to businesses of youth replacing experience and so offering renewed impetus and fresh perspective. It's a truism that businesses must always offer new ideas and innovations to avoid early expiry, but in our personal lives too, we often have that same desire. Many of us, as we get older, wish to re-invent ourselves and consider new challenges as we become more aware of our mortality. The alternative would be to endlessly play out our past lives and experiences until it eventually becomes neither healthy or sustainable leading to staleness and boredom. An idea that was once profitable, when repeated, never quite reaches the same peak and betrays our memory of it. What was exciting yesterday will not be so tomorrow – once unwrapped it loses its luster. Therefore, in life and in work an “out with the old, in with the new” mentality is often necessary to avoid redundancy of brain and business.

 

However, we generally lack the desire to throw away things that have worked for us in the past. So another cliché is invoked in opposition: “if it ain't broke, don't fix it”. So we adapt, we tweak, we re–configure. We gather up our experiences, our successes and our failures, swirl them around a bit and put them in a newly painted pot. And, mostly, it works . . . . but only for a while. We have to keep re–tuning to get the engine humming sweetly again. Often, our new schemes and plans are, in fact, just variations on an ageing original. Even lateral thinking only moves you sideways.

 

Of course, there can only be a finite population of truly original ideas in the world or our heads at any one time so there's nothing wrong with pushing a theme until the kettle stops whistling. Genuine originality is rare and nearly always countered with deep skepticism from the establishment, but we should learn from people like Nicolaus Copernicus, Charles Darwin and Jackson Pollock who were able to throw away convention and think anew, slowly pulling the critics in behind them, changing the world they knew and inspiring new generations.

 

So, to young and old alike, both in business and in person, do not blindly defer to experience and convention, walk against the mainstream for a while and steadfastly suffer the knocks. You may be ignored or pushed backwards, but be tenacious. Ironically, there's nothing original about this advice.

 

Paul

1386
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Oct 11th, 2011

Baking yourself creative

I've been watching the Great British Bake-off and it's caused me to ponder the link between baking and creativity.

 

Traditional baking has long been the domain of mothers and grandmothers, with creativity often influenced by what ingredients are available, and perhaps a mistake here and there. However, the modern version-as the Great British Bake-off illustrates-is a combination of good old-fashioned craft and modern innovation fed by something else.

 

What's it fed by?
That depends on the baker.

 

We do a fair bit of baking here at Seven Stones. Much of the creativity involved seems to be fuelled by fair bit of one-upmanship but other factors play a part, too. Curiosity is one. For example: what would happen if all the liquid ingredients in a cake were replaced with lemonade? Try it and see.

 

Personally, baking disasters are also a rich source of inspiration forcing me to look at something a different way. This always works best when the people who will be eating your creation don't know what it was meant to look like to begin with.

 

It's a bit like any other form of creativity: You can't sit around and wait for a good idea to come to you, but it might strike when you least expect it.

 

You've got to be able to recognise it when it comes, though.

1383
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Reflection
Oct 6th, 2011

Steve Jobs 1955-2011

steve.jpg

When I was 4 years old my father brought home an Apple Lisa.  I remember being so excited. In much anticipation it was unboxed; I had never seen a computer before. Then he switched it on. If I had known that this would be one of the most significant moments of my life I  would  have kept a picture or  memento.


I had never seen such an amazing machine, with a mouse, a graphical screen, an array of clickable interactive icons and programmes that fascinated me. My father told me that a young man called Steve Jobs invented this machine - I thought he must be the brightest man in the world. I decided then that computing would be my future, I wanted to be like Steve.

Now, 25 years later, my job is to create apps that will hopefully engage, assist and inspire our users. And the part of the job that excites me the most, is the moment we get to see our ideas come to life on an iPad, iPhone or computer. It makes me feel like the kid who switched on his parents’ Apple for the first time.

Sadly the Apple Lisa is long gone, but Steve Jobs and his vision in design, technology and business has motivated me, and many like me, to strive to do the best we can. He has left us a stage on which we can explore, create and bring our ideas to life.  Right now, a young person out there will stumble across these ideas and be inspired, just as they will continue to inspire this kid.

Thank you Steve,
James Klymowsky

Head of Digital
Seven Stones

1368
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by Paul on Oct 12th, 2011
  • The Apple Lisa was an overblown, 'designed by committee' personal computer which Jobs apparently hated. In response he personally took control of the Mac project to make sure it fitted his vision of a supremely elegant and easy to use computer. The rest is history.
More
PAGE
Discuss
Oct 5th, 2011

Neuromarketing: a debate that missed the point

A fascinating evening at the Royal Institute on Tuesday.

 

Faraday’s auditorium transformed into an amphitheatre where PhDs slugged out the case for and against neuroscience in marketing.

 

On the one hand an argument (more a sales pitch) that brain scanning has now become so accessible that marketers will no longer need to ask consumers what they think - they’ll be able to see what they think.

 

On the other hand the case for common sense. Why scan people’s brains to find out how they might behave. Just watch them behave.

 

On the night, common sense prevailed. And it was a particularly witty, cynical common sense so loved by the British. Arthur Smith meets Einstein.

 

But for us the sadness was what got lost in the argument.

 

Very much like politics – a debate between Boris and Ed Milliband might be entertaining but we might not learn much about what the country needs, right now.

 

The neuromarketing debate missed the valuable middle.

 

Human behaviour is incredibly hard to predict. And the things that people say they’ll do, often they don’t do.

 

This happens for many reasons. People lie. People change their minds. People are persuaded to do things they don’t want to do. People do not know what they will do.

 

So research that asks people what they’ll do, is flawed. And brave marketers have always known it and had the courage to ignore it: witness Vorsprung Durch Technic and the Sony Walkman to name two.

 

Watching what people actually do (ethnography) trumps any research asking people what they do. But that means launching products without research. So it’s often not practical.

 

But now brain scanning can begin to show what excites people even when they say they’re unmoved. So it can get behind the mask. At last we have a lie detector at our disposal.

 

As the cynical professor quipped, what we really need is scanning of the mind, not scanning of the brain.

 

That’s where neuroscience will pay its way, in marketing.

1369
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by Mattia Calissano on Oct 11th, 2011
  • Hello, I stumbled across your company website whilst looking for jobs, creativity and neuroscience and I find your post on neuroscience and people's behavior very interesting.

     

    I have a medical degree and a PhD in neuroscience, well, actually more in the molecular biology of neuronal cells rather than in the brain of individuals but in my job I am used to go from the very small and simple to the very big and complex. From DNA, proteins and cells to organs and people. Fractal theory applied to biological science.

     

    I think your post is very stimulating especially because it describes a scenario with an incredibly broad range of implications: scientific, moral, legal, creative and last but not least it scratches the surface of what we are. Whether mere envelopes for an obscure motor or rational entities that know what they want,

     

    I find the unpredictability of mankind, and of consumers, one of the best propellent for social dynamics and creativity. I do not think that people necessarily want better things, higher quality products or just the best out of something and hence the difficulty in understanding their, our, behavior. I think that people at times just want different things, different stimuli.

     

    Our 'soul' is not very good in understanding if a product, an idea, a passion is good or not. It just feels the powerful emotional aura around it. Our brain instead, compares, analyses, weighs pros and cons and is very good in trying to get a good deal or at least in to gaining something out of any experience. In the end I believe that very often the reasons of our 'soul' win over the reasons of our brain and we are drawn into buying, abiding, following something just for the ‘emotional scent’ it is left in its trail which might not necessarily be the best for ourselves.

     

    As for the use of brain scanning techniques to know what people really want/desire/hate etc I am not sure it can work outside a laboratory. I think that our brain and souls will always find ways to hide themselves from an investigative eye.

     

     

    Thanks for giving me the space to write a bit on this very interesting subject.

     

    Best regards,

     

    Mattia

     

     

    ––

    Mattia Calissano, MD PhD

More
PAGE
News
Sept 20th, 2011

Seven Stones branches out into painting and decorating

deco.jpg

We’ve taken an old-school approach to team building here at Seven Stones and divided ourselves into houses that take turns planning events. Our latest activity, organised by the house of Rubies, was a day of volunteering at the Trinity Centre in Plumstead, South East London.

 

The Trinity Centre offers a wealth of programmes and classes for locals including a lunch club and dance classes for pensioners, fitness and computer classes and baby, parent and toddler groups. It also provides services such as a domestic violence intervention programme and AA.

 

Our task for the day was to paint the childcare centre and the halls leading to it.  We split into teams and got stuck in. We had a few mishaps along the way—for example, one team member’s good shirt was accidently used as a brush cleaner, while another seemed to get more paint on himself than the walls. But small calamities aside, after a full day of painting the crèche looked fresh and clean and we felt the pride of a job well done.

 

All house events have some sort of competitive element so we finished the day off with a good old fashioned pub quiz… about paint... Here’s one that stumped a few of us: What’s the name of the current Dulux mascot?

 

In case you don’t know, it’s Spud. Old English Sheepdogs like him have represented the paint company for over 50 years—all with their own names, of course.

 

To find out more about the Trinity Centre visit www.trinityplumstead.org.uk/

1376
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Sep 7th, 2011

An arm and a leg for the price of a driving licence

It's long been known that bundled decisions work.

 

Enjoy a meal in a restaurant and it feels rude not to pay the 'optional gratuity'.

 

Expensive tailors can sell otherwise exorbitantly priced belts, ties and cufflinks because they seem cheap in relation to a two-thousand-pound hand made suit.

 

This phenomenon has been written up by Robert Cialdini in his book, Influence. And it seems the Government has been listening.

 

Now, when you apply for a driving licence you will be asked if you are prepared to be an organ donor at the start of the form. This new tactic is expected to improve organ donation pledges by 50 per cent.

 

How does this work? Perhaps in some recess in our mind we might feel that saying yes – and being a good citizen – will speed the application. Perhaps it’s just hard to say no after already saying yes. You’ve agreed to take the test and abide by the rules of the road, why not add another yes?

 

Either way, it's clever, isn't it?

1324
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
  • Posted by Paul on Oct 12th, 2011
  • Doesn't it just take a little self-discipline and a few seconds to decide for yourself the intrinsic value of something rather than comparing it against something else or being concerned what others would do?
More
PAGE
Discuss
Sep 1st, 2011

An odyssey of love and cancer

I recently read this extraordinary account from The Times in which Philip Gould describes his diagnosis and treatment at private trusts in the US and with NHS in the UK.

 

Quite apart from being the most inspiring piece on the subject I have read since John Diamonds
“C - because cowards get cancer too” it is also moving. He exposes his frailties in a way that shows great courage.

 

Though the essay is designed to help people who might suffer in the future, its explicit intention is to raise funds for the oesophageal unit in Newcastle.

 

However—In this world where healthcare has become such a political hot potato—for me the greatest message was the way the medical community on both sides of the Atlantic treated Gould and his fellow patients with dignity.

 

When the news is full of stories condemning the breakdown of healthcare we often forget the outstanding performance and compassion shown by professionals on the frontline.

1323
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Aug 24th, 2011

Boy friday

Yellow-Car.jpg

When I was a baby, cars rolled off the production line of variable quality.

 

Indeed the buyer had to beware the ‘Friday car’ – one whose production had been halted on a Friday and, by Monday morning, when the production line resumed, may not have been filled with the correct amount of oil or sufficient coats of paint…

 

Over the years, production systems, shift working and quality control have improved. The Friday car no longer exists.

 

But alarmingly, as we learn more about human beings, the same problems apply in rearing our children. And, sadly there are plenty of boy and girl Fridays around.

 

Research is showing that there is a critical period – of around 1000 days – in which the fundamentals are created that can’t be changed later. The 1000 days starts before conception and involves both parents living healthily and producing egg and sperm of the best possible quality. The period extends until the baby is two years old.

 

Even fathers smoking before conception can affect the development of the future baby’s heart.

 

While we reflect on the social ills of this summer and problems in society shouldn’t we also be educating all future parents that they can affect their unborn children’s potential even before they’ve settled down?

1388
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Aug 16th, 2011

Brain science and butterflies

Early natural sciences were very much about collecting things from nature.

 

In the case of the Voyages of Discovery this meant returning home with ships laden with bloody cadavers and butterflies shot in the canopy of rainforests with grapeshot made of walnut shells.

 

The real scientific exploration took place in the form of dissection. As if, by taking something apart we can learn what makes it whole. And so it was with an understanding of human brains. We’ve known about the form of the brain for thousands of years but only recently begun to understand how it ticks.

 

But in the last hundred years, and twenty in particular, we’ve made inroads into the function of living brains. But even this leaves huge questions unanswered; indeed we’ve learned the most by studying damaged brains. We now know, for example, that decisions cannot be made without the primitive (much older) part of the brain working, the bit that we have in common with mice. While we think that our intellect is in charge, it’s a slave to the feelings we share with the animal kingdom.

 

I was standing on my commuter platform the other day when an express train came through at full speed. There was an announcement and so it was not a surprise. And yet the visceral impact of 10,000 tonnes at 100 miles an hour made me quiver with irrational fear. I know it could not harm me. I expected it. But the fear – which also speaks from the primitive part of my brain – was in charge.

 

So decisions are often not made for the right reasons. They’re made for the right feelings. And I for one have more in common with a butterfly than you’d think.

1321
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More
PAGE
Discuss
Aug 4th, 2011

Tea and mini-pigs

Spot The Pig.jpg

The moment I realized that my placement at Seven Stones might be somewhat more interesting than traditional work experience was when a co-worker started cuddling a plush rabbit while talking on the phone to a client. While I previously had no concept of the vital importance stuffed lagomorphs played in the advertising of pharmaceuticals, my eyes were soon opened to their key role. The very next day I learned that in a pinch any stuffed animal would suffice as another co-worker thoughtfully brought in several soft toy lions for those of us, like myself, who were woefully ignorant of the need for cuddly toys. While a somewhat more mundane explanation was offered – that she happened to be moving house and was slowly decanting her possessions from home to home via her office desk – I know the true reason.

 

While the above incident is somewhat silly, the image I feel is appropriate for succinctly summarizing the ethos of Seven Stones; a combination of professionalism and individuality, business and pleasure – a Savile Row suit paired with funky Abercrombie and Fitch socks, both purchased just around the corner. I do wonder if it was the unique location that has caused this wonderful company vibe; an advertising agency on a street known for art galleries, two streets away from the second biggest shopping street in London, a short walk from both the refinement of the Ritz and the debauchery of Soho.

 

Whatever the reason, it works. In fact, it does a great job. I can honestly say that the people I’ve met working here have been some of the most lovely people I’ve met ever, a feat all the more impressive when you consider that they all work together. “Surely” I kept saying to myself as I was introduced to more co-workers, “Surely THIS person will be mean, or annoying or simply disinterested in me, so I can feel vindicated when I get mad at them”. But no, time and time again I raised my expectations and each time they were met.

 

Having spent 350 words gushing about the people and the atmosphere of Seven Stones, I suppose a description of my role is perhaps somewhat overdue, so before I get distracted further by talking about the comically large amount of food and drink available at Seven Stones (Wine Tasting = Free Booze!), I’m going to move on to the real meat of my experience. I started off on the second floor, where I swiftly settled in, due to my large repertoire of skills ranging from dream analysis to rapid-firing friendly sarcasm.

 

There I learnt some life skills, such as: Don’t feel obliged to say yes every time a co-worker asks if anyone wants a cuppa, because you WILL drink too much caffeine to sleep that night and, you don’t need money for lunch if your co-workers make chilli.

 

My role was to research various drugs on the internet in order to find out their potential competitors and therefore market opportunities. This role was given greater importance because it was research to prepare questions at a client meeting in Surrey. While my role at the meeting itself was limited to nodding, and looking attentive and beautiful, I found the whole experience very interesting, even if I was uncharacteristically quiet throughout it.

 

Later in the week my role was expanded to include looking up treatment issues associated with specific conditions and syndromes, and trawling through dense academic articles focusing on what specific drugs do to mini-pigs, and what human reactions should therefore be – having seen mini-pigs before, this human’s reaction was “awwwww”.

 

For my second week I moved up in the world, all the way to the third floor, where I trawled through survey responses for Strata to find trends among physicians administration of baby formula for tiny babies. This was also fascinating, as it put into sharp contrast the discrepancy between the GPs and the dieticians, the description of paediatricians as mavericks, and the demographics most likely to choose specific flavours for their medicine. Later on I also compiled a list of smartphone apps related to medicine in an attempt to find both market openings and the sort of designs that were popular with the healthcare industry.

 

To sum up then, I’ve very glad I managed to have such a fascinating two weeks, in a trendy area of London, where I ate lots of great food, saw lots of stuffed toys, read lots of medical studies and had a wonderful time with absolutely fabulous people!

1259
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/service.php
/index.php/tools/blocks/article/contact.php
Add a comment
More



Older blogs...