Hacking the Matrix

by Kat Grider

Neo wanted out of the Matrix. So do I.

After that red pill, Neo knew the Matrix was only a simulation of what life could be, should be. A simulation built by the evil super-computers who had taken over the earth. 

After working in a small, consistent agile team, I know the agency model of assigning work using a matrix view of employees and projects is a simulation of what my work life at an agency could be, should be. A simulation built by some well-meaning business folks back in the 70s. 

People living happily in the Matrix thought Neo was nuts. 

Likewise, it's really, really hard to explain to prospective Aha Method clients and even to my own team exactly why a matrix management style is so painful for me. 

Most of them believe that because agencies deal with an ever shifting volume of work and that the type of work fluctuates just as wildly that then, in order to be successful, "we need to manage in multiple dimensions: horizontally where we align and optimize business processes and projects that serve the customer, and vertically, where we manage the resources that are then deployed to the horizontal arena."  (Definition of Matrix Management from a 2012 Human Resources Management Report.)

But I've had the opportunity to work on brands like Audi and The North Face using an agile management approach. We eventually managed these accounts from the perspective of a small, cross-functional, agile team (not just dev, but everybody) that was built to adeptly handle the fluctuations and the variation in the work. 

Yep, Bree and I have lived in a third dimension if you will...and it was ah-mah-zing.

But don't take my word for it, Dave Aron, wrote a Harvard Business Review article where he predicts that by 2020, 30% of work will be performed by permanently employed, self-managed clusters. 

While his definition of a Cluster (an external team hired by the company as a unit) is slightly different from the Aha Method definition (a self-organizing internal team of the company), the four main benefits he outlines apply to both:

• Higher levels of business performance through higher motivation. The cluster model, when executed well, addresses known performance drivers such as purpose, autonomy, and mastery (see Daniel Pink's book Drive for more on these).
• Higher levels of business performance through a custom work environment. Clusters can create and sustain leading-edge electronic work environments since they are less burdened by bureaucratic decision-making and the need to serve the diverse needs of many types of teams and individuals.
• Talent management in the right place. The cluster model removes the burden of team and individual performance management from the business — where it typically sits uncomfortably and ineffectually today — to the cluster. The cluster knows its own members, contributions and development needs much better.
• Higher levels of personal happiness. Clusters are sufficiently small for members to genuinely know and care about each other, and they are stable and autonomous enough for members to support each other's long-term personal development.

I know most of the agency folks threw their hands up about 6 paragraphs ago, rolled their eyes and muttered something about "well, lucky you miss fancy pants to be on big fat retainers where you can dedicate a team...but few of us are that fortunate." Yes, I first lived in the agile cluster utopia on a retainer. BUT, I've run the numbers with the director of PMO at my current gig and using the right approach we can work the work like we're on a retainer, even if we aren't. It just takes some smart resource forecasting (potentially across multiple accounts), a dedication to incremental growth on existing accounts and a willingness to take a risk. 

I say risk because it will require your internal teams to be willing to try something new. But the truth is, it's actually an investment because, guess what - clients don't want to get stuck in the matrix either. They know when you are simulating talent. Meaning, when you pitched it one way but end up staffing it another due to your best players being drawn and quartered every day in the Matrix.

There was a great headline in a January issue of AdAge: Kao USA to Agencies: We Want Your 'A-Team' on Our Account. They went on to quote directly from Kao's Request for Proposal:

"Kao wants to be an important priority for your agency and does not want to get lost or relegated to the 'B' team."

The headline I hope to read sometime in the near future reads:
Kao USA Discovers that 'A-Team' Stood for 'Agile-Team'

Until then. I hope at least a few of you will consider hacking the system along with us.

A Happy Family is an Agile Family

by Kat Grider

Giving parenting advise is dangerous. Although, I have to admit, Bree is full of fabulous one-liners for using with small people:

• "You are in charge of your own fun."
• "You are cute, but not that cute."
  
• And my personal favorite: "Stay focused on the task at hand."

That being said, neither one of us is dumb enough to write a blog on how to run your family. We are, however, smart enough to pass along this awesome article full of Agile tidbits from WSJ titled: Family, Inc.

Excerpt:

"When my wife and I adopted the agile blueprint in our own home, weekly family meetings with our then-5-year-old twin daughters quickly became the centerpiece around which we organized our family. The meetings transformed our relationships with our kids—and each other. And they took up less than 20 minutes a week."

We are also behind enough in our writing that this post is from February. But, we thought it still worth sharing in the case that you haven't read it yet. 

Strategizing is for Prom Queens

by Bree Thomas

I hear the word “strategy” thrown on just about everything. Like rhinestones on a South-Texas-prom-queen’s dress, “strategy” is too often a cheap and easy bedazzle on everything from powerpoint slides, to someone’s superfluous commentary in a meeting that is already running too long with too many attendees. Anymore, in my day-to-day, Strategy is quite the loose little buzzword.

Often, it is a noun, as in “brand strategy” or “I am a strategist." Sometimes it is an adjective, as in “strategic vision” or “strategic insights." Also, as an adverb, such as “strategically developed” or “strategically placed.” And lets not forget it as a verb, as in “strategize” (which for the record, makes me want to punch the speaker in the nose every time I hear it).

And that isn’t to say that I don’t use the word often myself. But I used to accept the word at what I believed was its face value - a sense of something great and purposeful. A sense that when I heard “strategy” - I knew we were talking about the key to winning whatever was at stake, the secret sauce critical to achieving the mission. I knew we’d be talking about something tangible, and most importantly - something actionable. (Strategy is, by definition a military term that, in a nutshell means using your brains and your guts to not only stack the odds in your favor, but empower you to make the right decisions when confronted with any obstacle.)

Now, given the bedazzling trend, I’ve made it my personal charge to pay much closer attention when the word “strategy” is presented. Analyzing it quietly in my head, from every angle. Challenging my own application of it constantly. Because the real disturbing trend, is not that the word gets overused, but rather that the very concept of strategy has become a crutch. A well disguised excuse NOT to act. An exercise in lengthy requirements gathering to plan for problems and scenarios that don’t yet exist. A perceived need to create a long list of tasks for what should happen in the future, when instead we should be driving for real feedback via iterative launches in the present. I see terms like “strategic goals” and “strategic vision” plastered across powerpoint slides, and the actual bullet points associated with most of these goals and visions, amount to little more than minute tactics positioned as passive options to explore. Presented in the context of “we are working on”, or “working toward”, or “think there is great opportunity within this area”.

And with that lack of conviction, certainty, drive - fucking nothing can be won. It’s all a lot of bling with very little bang.

So here is what I'm really driving at - let's all of us in the industry be more thoughtful with strategy. That when creating, executing, presenting, or thinking about strategy in any context, let’s be critical of ourselves, of our interpretation of strategy and when/how/why it matters or is applied. As an example, do we sometimes create formality where it isn’t warranted - like laboring over a “social media strategy”, when maybe all we really need is to just be social? Or when our strategy feels like it is a moving target, and people struggle with how to articulate it - should we check our premises? Are there assumptions at play that have been driving a weak, obtuse strategy? And if the goals are ill-defined, then no amount of “strategic planning” is going to get us anywhere, even if we wrap that anemic goal in a shiny label called “strategic vision.” 

Diamonds are a girl's best friend for a reason  - because they have real value. The real, lasts-for-a-100-years-and-cut-glass kind of value. Fortunately, making sure your strategy has actual value is really pretty simple - just ask yourself, is your strategy something your team can:

• Articulate without a slide in front of them?
• Apply in any given situation?
• Execute against to deliver desired results?
• Feel empowered and confident in so doing?

Aha-Method.com Launches. Noobs & Newbs Welcome.

by Kat Grider & Bree Thomas

Kat: You may have noticed that Bree’s been absent from blog posts lately. That’s because she’s been coming home from her day-job, hiding in her basement pounding Red Bulls and listening to the Beastie Boys while coding our sweet new site. Okay, the reality is that she’s been grabbing little snippets of time to pair with a few of our favorite devs from Mode Set in Denver to learn how to code our sweet new site.  

Bree: (R.I.P. MCA) Yep, in my vast amounts of spare time, I’ve been learning front-end code because: (1) I’m a nerd at heart, (2) a well-known control freak, and  (3) Kat and I both believe having a coder, no matter how much the noob, brings value and better perspective in our roles as marketers and Aha Method founders.  

Kat: Of course, we’re also stoked to have somewhere to send folks inquiring about our Aha Method approach. And, in true iterative fashion this site is our MVP. We look forward to learning what works and what doesn’t and continuing to improve the content. Drop us a line with your comments/suggestions. (On that note, feel free to comment within this post on the word ‘noob’. While co-authoring, Bree and I got into a spelling debate.)

Bree: My first lesson in coding was a spelling lesson given by one of my all-time favorite grumpy developers (and personal friend).  See email chain below (developer respectfully kept confidential) for what was definitely a hysterical, if not humbling and sobering exchange. The truth is that even when we are in essence saying the same thing, the unsaid context is always what trips us up. Shared language and shared perspective is how we get to shared success.

Kat & Bree: And that is why The Aha Method was born.  

Balance is for Sissies. We're Looking for Tension.

by Kat Grider

I had a strategist friend, Ken, tell me recently that all great brands have tension in their brand values or characteristics. For instance, if a brand is both curious and responsible or a bridge as well as a driver, those  values being somewhat in opposition, then there is a healthy tension that makes for an interesting, rich, compelling brand that can stand the test of time. 

That has brought me great peace of mind as a mother.
And great reassurance as an Aha Method founder.

Let me explain:
Women are always talking about trying to find balance between work and home, self and family. Or, they are upset that anyone even acts like there is a balance - the idea being that everything is a tradeoff in which something or someone is suffering  whether you admit it or not.  My guess is fellas have the same struggle. And even if you don't the next point still applies.

If we are all, as individuals, our own brand, then Ken would tell us we shouldn't be looking for balance in the first place. We should be identifying and embracing the tension in our lives that makes us interesting, beautifully complex individuals. This tension creates a check and balance that keeps us on point, keeps us sharp, gives us a certain vitality.

I'm not saying it's easy to manage the tension. I'm not saying it doesn't require give and take and a very honest look at your priorities. But I like the idea of my essence, or personality, being crafted by very dynamic forces. But then, I've never been drawn to boring.

Which is why, one of the things Bree and I juggle along with kiddos, full time jobs, husbands, PTA, marathon training and reading a good book now and then - is the Aha Method. 

Leading to my second point:
Our approach is firmly rooted in the idea that everyone who touches the work participates in the decisions that will guide the work. 

The strategic decisions: what are the business objectives, the risks? Who are the stakeholders and how will we know if we are successful? Ultimately, what is really required to deliver on the objectives successfully?
The tactical decisions: what will it take to build whatever we've decided on? How big is each task relative to the rest?

This team effort could result in conflict, but we've found that drawing on agile and lean best practices allows us to uncover and capitalize on a healthy tension between:

• What the client thinks they want (they are part of the strategic team)
• What everyone thinks the user needs
• And what the team can actually do within the timeframe

It leads to a healthy give and take between individuals (again, anyone who is touching the work) which always results in the best 'thing' (website, app, presentation) for the end user and, therefore, for the business.

If the best brands, (even our personal ones) spring forth from a bit of healthy tension, I'd say the same is true of the best teams. Hit us up at the Aha Method if you're in need of a little coaching around how to create healthy tension in your work life and teams. When it comes to uncovering the dynamic elements in your personal life you are on your own - but Bree and I both recommend going for a good, long run...or, of course, a pole dancing class. NOTE: this post remains gender inclusive as we've seen guys both on the trail and in the dance studio...the latter being a very memorable Aha Moment!

What the 'Rose Ceremony' and your RFP have in Common

by Kat Grider

The point of the Bachelorette is for the audience to view a bevy of good looking men come trouncing through Malibu castle doors offering up the best, most evenly spray tanned, versions of themselves in order to get picked by a single eligible female. And the Bachelorette in question is apparently working off the assumption that you don't know what you want until you see it, professionally wrapped and done up with a bow -- so the more men the merrier. 

The point of some agency reviews is for the brand to get a slew of talented agencies to submit their best selves in PDF or PPT format and then, a lucky few, may come sell their wares in-person.  And, according to certain CMOs, this is as delightful as a group helicopter date complete with champagne. They, like the Bachelorette, assume the more ideas, wrapped in pretty packages, the more likely you are to find something you want.

I don't smell roses. I smell something the cows left behind.

First of all, smart, talented people should not be working insane hours on a pitch, all the time wondering whether they are subject to a procurement exercise and prancing their ponies just for show, or whether they are actually in the running. Such exercise is wasteful. The BRAT abhors waste.

Second, and more importantly -- true love happens when you know what you are looking for in a partner. Yes, there will be some surprises along the way, but if you don't know yourself well enough to know what you need to, dare I say, complete you, then it will be impossible for anyone to please you for very long. Brands are responsible for knowing what they need to drive the business forward and clearly articulating those goals.  The agency is responsible for explaining how their team would tackle those goals. The agency review process should be about finding the best business partner, not the sexiest creative or another "big idea."

So here's a thought, let's rework the traditional pitch process all together and start valuing more substance over gift-wrap.

WHAT IF:

• Agencies brought less creative comps and more analysis? 
• Brands paid agencies to pitch? (Not necessarily an hourly rate, but a token of respect and a way to ensure you only get called in if they really think you can win.)
• We all quit estimating each line item and instead talked about the skill sets required to meet the business opportunities (which, by the way, change all the time)

I know, I know, the Bachelorette has been on for almost a decade because certain formulas work. Tradition should count for something. But, as a recent Ad Age article about this very topic said,

"...maybe you should consider that a decision based on habits and myths may not be strategic.  It might be as stupid as it sounds."  - Ad Age Article

Habits and myths are powerful things. But you know what's even more powerful -- common sense. People want to do good work, they want to compete and they want to know they aren't chasing tails or giving away their work. Now, I'll drink champagne in a heart-shaped hot tub to that. 

Source of Inspiration: Microsoft Open Technologies

by Kat Grider

Bree and I are big fans of the MVP -- Minimum Viable Product, as popularized by Eric Ries (theleanstartup.com). It's essentially a strategy for building fast and building small in order to launch and measure iteratively - gaining valuable and REAL user/consumer feedback along the way. This feedback defines your go-forward decisions in product and features.

The result is less waste, more timely innovation, and ultimately a much better chance of legitimate success. I know, it sounds like a wonder drug promising to help you lose 100 lbs without even breaking a sweat...and it kind of is.  We embrace it as a mindset, applying it to everything we encounter professionally and while we still break a sweat it looks more like what we Southerners call a 'glisten'. We even use it to build huge PPT presentations for pitches and it's been one of our most successful Aha Method tools.

In a recent meeting with some folks from the Microsoft Open Technologies team, a subsidiary of Microsoft dedicated to building and maintaining code that bridges proprietary Microsoft software with the open source community, we were chatting about how powerful MVP is as a mindset. They told me that they don't use MVP, they use MRDV.

They think about it as the Minimum Required to Deliver Victory.

While the acronym is unfortunate (it brings to mind those TV ads that promote aforementioned wonder drugs and  quickly and quietly list the side effects which typically include hair loss and/or death) it has resolved for Bree and I the nagging issue around training teams in an MVP mindset. The thing is, they take one look at the word minimum and take it to mean cheap or quick.  Sometimes clients forget that delivering on objectives and success metrics is rarely cheap or quick. The MRDV title places an emphasis on success, aka Victory,  in a way that might help us avoid these incorrect, pre-conceived notions.

So, a big thanks to the Open Technologies team for sharing their take on this tool. And, here's to MRDV...which, like so many great marketing techniques, probably shouldn't be combined with heavy machinery and/or Benadryl.

Way to Go Deutsch

by Bree Thomas

Hedy Lamarr - Sex Symbol and Genius Inventor

I spoke at the 4A's Create Tech 2012 with David Slayden, founder of BDW, regarding the talent problem facing many agencies today - in that they are hard pressed to find the right talent and even harder pressed to retain it (video of our talk on 4A's Site).  One of our key takeaways for the room was that it wasn't about how much beer an agency had on tap, or even how much money they might throw at a would-be candidate.  To attract and retain today's digital talent, the first step is to realize that today's talent no longer needs the agency, and their real motivation lies in making great product.  So for an agency, giving today's talent the space to think, make and innovate - requires a change in process, team structure, thinking and ultimately - culture.  

And then Winston Binch, CDO of Deutsch LA and keynote speaker for the conference, spoke the following day regarding inventioni.st  (video of talk on 4A's Site), the agency's new offer/product structure for clients.    And I think Deutsch may have just nailed the aforementioned issue right on the head….with a reinvention of themselves for a new kind of client.  Way to go Deutsch.   A product innovation team within the agency, working with clients in 5 day sprints, 45 day cycles and/or 6 month deep dives.  Lean marketing has arrived.  Building shit instead of talking about building shit.  Truly working iteratively and even defining a new department of new resources around the idea of building shit and testing it out - inventors.  

If you are slapping yourself on the forehead right now, and thinking "fuck! I wish I'd thought of that!".  Well good.  Because the truth is - we should all be thinking more like that.  And here is the thing….  a lot of people are certainly talking about thinking more agile, or talking about how to market iteratively, or talking about how to think like a startup to attract today's talent - but most of it is just that - talk.  And that isn't to say the talk isn't important, but we all know how cheap it can be.  And lately, I think "agile", "iterative", "lean" have become the new black in buzz words, with nobody wearing them well and all starting to feel like a cheap thrill for selling in the latest "digital capability" or for trying to attract the latest "inventors."

But change is hard right?  And all this talk feels a little mad scientist in nature, what with experimenting and inventing, agile mindsets and lean approaches, what does it all mean in the real day-to-day world and why the hell should you care - as an agency or as a client?  

Simple - because you could be doing more on less, if you just knew what that meant and how to get there.  It's about turning cheap talk into an invaluable process and point of difference. Deutsch is doing it. The Aha Method is doing it. What's your take on doing it?

Sweet Seattle Cribs and Why You Care

by Kat Grider

Tom Kundig: "The smaller the project, the more human it is."

Thanks to POSSIBLE I got to hear from one of Seattle's most well-known architects, Tom Kundig, speak about design principles. As he clicked through stunning images of landscapes and built objects both big and small, my gears were whirring - his approach to building beautiful buildings and our approach to building successful digital projects have a lot in common. Here are a few takeaways that really resonated (many of these are paraphrased as I  was trying to not look like that jackass who was texting during a presentation).

Remember the source. 
Kundig made it clear that his source is the landscape of Eastern WA where he grew up. His respect for the landscape is evident in the materials and scope of his project. He said, "Small buildings allow you to sense the landscape." Check out this 1,000 sq foot cabin. 

Likewise, Bree and I try to remember the source of our passion - the exhilarating, enterprising, adapting landscape of humans and technologies that make up digital. Our goal is to be a small, nimble team, teaching other small, nimble teams who can sense the surrounding landscape and respond with smarts and elegance. 

Right size.
He said "It isn't just about being small, but about being the right size." He deals in volumes, in the size of spaces. Digital teams deal in the volume of work, the scope of a 'thing'. Too often clients hear: agile = small = cheap = job done. When instead they should hear: agile = small = efficient and focused work = job done right (which is rarely cheap!). 

The work is about humans.
"The smaller the project, the more human." Kundig tends to do more residential work because he likes working with a family, with their story. He said that leads to a lot of inspiration for him. But, even in his more commercial work he keeps it 'human' by recognizing and showcasing the work of skilled tradesmen and women.

Apparently, this breathtaking winery, relied on a concrete team who had only done sewage and water treatment plants before - but they were craftsman nonetheless. In the same way we teach teams to focus on the humans involved  - the end-user and their teammate who is a craftsman or woman. Successful work is about successful relationships and we give teams frameworks to grow productive and meaningful partnerships with clients and with their peers. 

I think one of Kundig's last lines of the evening may become the Aha Method motto: 
Keep it simple, elegant, small. 
Focus on how time will affect it. 
Think about the humans doing the work.

Oh, and when we make it big, I think we'll go with this for our office space. 

Suits are for Suckers. Discuss.

by Kat Grider

I was inspired by a recent 37 Signals post on formality, "We’re breaking down the stranglehold of formality everywhere. No more personal secretaries, memos on official letterhead, meetings that must happen in person. There’s never been less mental mask switching between work and play. We wear the same clothes, use the same technology. It’s a liberation of the mind and it’s the new world order."

This got me thinking about 2 things:

1. People respond to generalizations. Readers got fired up about whether or not wearing a suit is a legit sign of a progressive workplace - there were 63 comments as of today. We'd love that kind of conversation on our blog - so plan on the continued use of opinionated generalizations that you may or may not agree with, by The Brat. For instance, "Texas is the finest country on earth". Now, discuss.
2. Agencies have broken the chains of unnecessary formality...until every Monday morning at 10 am. Yep, we are flexible, creative and a bastion of progress until Monday morning when timesheets are due.  Finance sends out a note reminding everyone to submit their time. Then employees go back to their calendar and try to remember what they did last week. Inevitably we take a few good guesses, fill in the form and just try to get the thing done so we can get back to our real job. 

This feeds the estimating and forecasting machine.  The machine sucks. 

The machine is archaic (based on the old print/radio/TV days) and a formality based on mistrust (between Employer and Employee and Agency and Client).  In sum, the machine should be dismantled, put through a chipper, doused with Aqua Net, lit on fire and then buried in a cement (pronounced See-ment) tomb under the Alamo.  

Too much? Okay, how about this - How about we just quit estimating by roles, variable rates, minute tasks and half hours. 

Digital is different. Digital is about a team building a malleable piece of software that depends on  changing technologies and a rapidly evolving consumer. Digital estimating should be about identifying the right people needed to do the work and then dedicating their time for a set period.

So, let's use a flat rate which creates a set number of hours based on the budget and then have people work against this in short sprints and, gasp, allow for and even encourage responsiveness. Give the client visibility as tasks change and how that impacts the budget and the timeline.

It may sound idealistic. But guess what, it can be done. Bree and I have used this process with clients. Our buddies over at Mode Set operate this way all day long. And while the alternative of sticking with what we know may be more comfortable, remember that formality by definition is: a necessary but insignificant procedure: a procedure that must be followed because it is a rule or custom, but has little significance or effect in itself. 

Timesheets are a custom, a formality. They have little significance in generating or driving actual work. It's time to evolve this financial processes. It will look differently for every agency, every organization. But it will look like the future.  

Now, personally, I don't care if you are in a 3-piece suit or your birthday suit when you rework this process. Whatever gets you there faster.

Bloopers from Boulder

by Kat Grider & Bree Thomas

We ran our workshop at BDW this last weekend and, as always, had a great time with the students. (Heads up to those looking to hire their next digital powerhouse - this year's crew is shaping up to be full of 'em.)    Here are three of the best takeaways from the weekend:

The soundbite: "There are like 400 Terriers"
Yep, that's true. And, odds are you haven't seen every single one of 'em. Likewise, when someone says 'form with multiple fields' you will have a tough time thinking of all the implications on your own. Does it need to accommodate multiple languages? How do they do the zipcode in Europe? When is a drop down better than an entry field? What data integration challenges does it represent? Do we have to use a stupid Capcha feature? 

The point: Estimating should be collaborative across teams and departments. You haven't seen it all, but all together you might have.

The soundbite:  "Let's just go CRAZY!"
This is funny when you are iterating using tennis balls and buckets. It isn't so funny when you are facing a massive deadline and have a lot of code to write and creative to comp. If your team is in sync, and knows what 'flow' feels like, they won't try to 'work harder, work faster', instead they will be managing client expectations long before the final sprint.  Oh - and a wine bar never hurts.

The point: Teams get crazy (in a chainsaw kind of way) when they crack the whip instead of managing the workflow from the get go. 

The soundbite: "Kat, we'll never compete with porn"
Okay, this learning happened over a glass of wine at the end of the day as we discussed our blog. Apparently, when you type in Bree + Kat + Brat...you don't get our blog on the first page. You get a buffet of babes who aren't selling agile...but do talk about being flexible. (Eeew.) Kat couldn't quite believe that we hadn't done a keyword check before we launched the blog and tried to ask Bree about metadata, paid ads, etc.  Bree just laughed and said, if all else fails, clearly there is opportunity for the brand in other areas.

The point: It's important to not over-plan or over-think every possible scenario. But do think of the likely keyword searches before launching. Duh.

Punch that Sucker in the Middle

by Bree Thomas

In my transition to client-side, I inherited a client/agency relationship with the predictable kiss and punch cadence. Both of them spouting piss and vinegar behind one another's back, and then smiling through passive aggressive cheap shots in meetings with one another, all in a very obvious effort to assign blame for missed expectations/deadlines.  But, instead of puckering up or putting on my gloves, I simply put the teams on a sprint format, gave them a little coaching, and it worked wonders.  They realized immediate efficiencies, faster pace in the work and most importantly - they begin to trust one another.  There was however, still one person I constantly had up against the ropes...our Account Manager on the Agency side. 

Here's the thing - the group doing the work, the team who built the software critical to our organization, was merely contracted through the Agency.  So for the day-to-day sprints, my designated client-side team was working directly with the agency-contracted-development-team in the sprint format.  And this is good. The people doing the work, should be the ones having the conversation.

Unfortunately, the Agency, in desperate need of proving their worth, kept trying to find ways to insert the appointed Account Manager into the day-to-day.  And this is bad.  This is where I start putting Vaseline on my forehead and wrapping my knuckles.

A natural outcome of the sprint dynamic is the elimination of superfluous roles/team members.  I cannot emphasize this enough - if you do not bring value to the team, meaning you are not a decision maker, nor one actually doing the work, then you are at best a middle-man.  

And you should be Knocked the Fuck Out (of the equation).
Because the middle-man creates waste.  
And waste erodes relationships.

The time for both agencies and clients to understand what it takes to market, create and manage in digital is long overdue.  And to be clear – the answer is not just in hiring digitally skilled resources to make digital things - and then try to "manage" them. 

A client once told me, “I never outsource my brain.”  That has stuck with me for years.  Because when you think about it, simply hiring "digital talent" to make your "digital things" is outsourcing your brain, and it isn’t enough anymore. Today's teams don't need another box checker or messenger.  They need qualified members and relevant stakeholders to participate in the development of the end product in a meaningful way.

The frameworks and tools that Kat and I provide to agencies and clients, won’t teach teams how to write code, but they will teach teams how to self-organize into small, productive groups and how to work collaboratively and rapidly within that group.

And this is 1-2 punch combo that is critical to affect measurable change within your marketing, your teams and ultimately – your ROI.

Going for the Gold

by Kat Grider

While all of you were watching the Fierce 5 (bad ass little ladies), catching up on those crazy badminton regulations (no throwing the game you kooks) and admiring the morning dressage (the royals are just common rich people after all) I am watching Nike and Adidas.

And I've learned one thing. 

Doesn't matter how much you spend, what you sponsor or how many places your logo appears - what matters is your ability to tell a story in a finite amount of time that creates infinite ripples. 

Ad Age reports that:

"As the Olympic Games began last week, Nike's "Find Your Greatness" landed at No. 1 on the Viral Chart, with 4.5 million views (about 1.7 million paid). Compare that to Adidias, an Olympics sponsor, whose "Take the Stage" campaign, which arrived at No. 3 on the chart, with 2.9 million views, according to Visible Measures.

Overall, "Take the Stage" has had 5.7 million views (about 1.6 million paid) since it launched in April, so Nike has nearly caught up in just a week. Having firmly linked itself with London, many viewers believe that the brand is affiliated with the games. Last week, Ad Age reported that an online survey by Toluma Global Omnibus Survey found that of 1,034 US consumers, 37% identified Nike as an Olympic sponsor, compared to 24% for real sponsor Adidas."

Here's the point. We won't be the first or the only to talk about agile, lean and changing the agency/client relationship. But we will do it with a stronger voice. We will do it with more panache, more energy and more soul than the rest. 

As Bree would say, "We just f'ing do it".  And, you are going to want to do it with us. 

Why the Agency World Needs Super Nannies

by Kat Grider

I was watching the Super Nanny today (while postponing writing this blog post and pretending to be doing parental research) and this wacky British family was still feeding their 2 1/2 year old children pureed food. In some cases they were force feeding them so that they would at least taste it... and then hate it. Fortunately Jo, in her nurse white pumps, put that to an end. 

But, it made me think that in some ways we in the agency world have continued to force feed clients old fashioned, pureed processes because that's what we are all used to, even though we may hate the way it makes us work. No one stopped to recognize that changes in media (digital!) should have us sitting down to a meal made of a very different, much more satisfying process by now. 

That's why Bree and I are writing. We're dishing up a different approach to running, and working with, an agency. A framework that grows developmentally advanced agencies and big, strong brands. 

But, before we get into what we are really proposing, let me clarify a few things. Bree and I are not British, in fact we both have Texas roots and do an excellent Southern twang when needed. Bree is the tattooed, ex-bartender, ex-lawyer with hot-pink hair and a knack for the F-bomb. She has more in common with Gordon Ramsay than Jo the Super Nanny. I am her daughter-of-a-preacher, ex-ballet dancer, ex-journalist counterpart. I'd like to think of myself as the Kate Middleton of Midland, but only because I too wear some outfits more than once.

But like Jo, we do care deeply, sincerely and lovingly about our work. We are passionate about nurturing a new way of doing business - where both agencies and clients thrive. Thing is, it will require you to swallow some strange new ideas, and keep them down. But we promise, it will be like going from pureed peas to risotto with fresh peas, herb rubbed lamb chops and a bottle of bubbly.

In the words of the nanny, "The truth is a powerful thing".
As Gordon would say,"F'ing brilliant." 

Landing on the Moon in Stilettos

by Bree Thomas

Generally speaking, I am either "on" or "off" with no in-between.  So it is only natural that I would find myself rocketing out of a fast-paced, high-octane, uber-digital Ad Agency, with a pretty paycheck and esteemed position –- to suddenly finding myself parked in an uber-traditional and quaint agency, on a three-month freelance consulting contract, double-checking that I still had a pulse.  And that was the easy part. Then I had to figure out how to unwind, decompress, pull myself together again, and help this agency discover what it takes to "work in digital." It was like I landed on the fucking moon.

I jumped in head first, full assimilation into a foreign landscape, ready to find opportunity in every crater and leave no lunar rock unturned.  As far as I was concerned, the task at hand was straightforward, in my wheelhouse, and an easy assessment and sell-through.  But then as luck would have it… I vastly underestimated my Martian status on the moon.  Shit.  Come to find out, the agency held its own preconceived notion that if I could simply answer a couple of their questions, then they would have a 'roadmap' for competing in digital marketing and communications for the next decade.   
Question #1:  What is a unique digital product that we can develop for sale?
Question #2:  Who do we hire to make it?

Dammit to hell.  I was going to light that notion up hotter than Georgia asphalt in the summer and then stick my stiletto in it good and proper.  Which is precisely what I thought they wanted, but I might have been better off borrowing Kat’s ballet flats in the first month, as I explained to them that not only were they asking the wrong questions, but they needed to take a good, hard look at how they ran their business from the inside to the outside.  And that was just to survive for the next couple years.  And my assessment, which ran contrary to what they thought they hired me to tell them, was not well received.  Admittedly I don't waste precious time bothering with lengthy, coddling deliveries - I prefer straight to the point and frank honesty.  Life is short after all, but you can imagine some friction ensued as a result of said delivery.  To quote my Mama,  “Bless your heart darlin’ – but you don’t know any authority other than your own and that will be both a blessing and a curse for you.”  Duly noted – again.

Interestingly enough – a ton of agencies are in the same situation, seeking answers to similar questions.  Maybe not verbatim, and all are on varying paths in their quest to elevate their digital services, but one recurring theme persists – agencies are so busy viewing digital as just another channel, clamoring to build up their staff with people who will make “digital things”, they have completely misdiagnosed where the real opportunity lies.   The opportunity is in molding an adaptive business platform that: includes client as a member of the day-to-day team, draws from the processes of software development, embraces the unknown in scope, and throws every traditional organizational agency norm out the fucking window from perspective to process to culture.  

And I am passionate about that adaptive platform. And passionate about working better to make better work.  And I absolutely deliver it with the no-frills-attached approach, because there is no crying in advertising and I will not sacrifice clarity in the name of ego-stroking.  

Did I mention they didn't offer to extend my consulting contract?  
Ha!  That Mama of mine... Right. Every. Damn. Time.

Romper Room

by Kat Grider

Continuing my theme of child-rearing (Why the Agency World Needs Super Nannies) I thought I'd share a few points on the daily stand-up, morning review, status update or whatever you may have named that special time of day when your team comes together to discuss the progress of a project. 

Like naps are to a baby, status meetings are to a project team - essential. It is when you make sure you are meeting incremental deadlines and driving toward the finish line with the right product. It is also when you often want to tear your hair out, weave it into a lasso and then capture and attempt to strangle your neighbor. On one particular project these meetings became known, unaffectionately, as the Romper Room. 

Here's the thing. We had a lot of talented, over-worked people meeting daily on a highly visible project, but we had very few tools to instill accountability and peace of mind on a digital project of this scale.

Account Managers felt like babysitters. They were hand-holding, spoon-feeding and begging people to get the work done. 
Project Managers felt like ineffective parents. The project timeline wasn't possible...but also was seemingly immovable.
Designers felt teen angst all over again. Their excellent work wasn't even being recognized, just their problems with authority, aka deadlines.
Developers felt like they were always getting blamed for something they didn't do. The deadline would be compressed by the time the work got to them, despite their warnings.

By the end of the meeting everyone acted like big, whiny, babies. Talking over each other, ignoring issues and turning flow charts into phallic symbols. And, while we might have liked to throw the babies out with the bathwater, we knew they weren't really the problem. So, we started over--- and approached project execution from a dev-centric POV and instituted the following:

• Pivotal Tracker for the creative team. They would estimate and be assigned work just like the development team. Giving them clear visibility of all the work on their plate and the status of that work (accepted or rejected by the client).  And now there was one view of the team’s velocity and priorities on a macro and micro scale within the tool. 

• Notable for the account team. They would take down all client changes in context of the visual comps, and share with the team. They had to be precise in their note-taking.
  

• And, most importantly we empowered the account team with a new method of communication. They were allowed to say ‘yes and...’ - meaning they could effectively push back on client because they understood the project velocity. They let client know in very clear terms what changes would do to the timeline and the budget and worked with them to prioritize the work accordingly.

Actual, legitimate, liquidy tears were shed in that Romper Room. Before the change in process and during. But, in the end, the new approach resolved the majority of the issues that had been plaguing the project for months. 

Yep, we believe it is time to re-think the agency process. And there are tools that can help you implement this change - so long as you can put up with some crying. But as our Moms always said about a good cry -"That's just good exercise for the lungs, darling".  

Why Agency Estimating is Like Fight Club

by Bree Thomas

For all the creative juices and acute intellect flowing through an agency on any given day, it is amazing how truly base and primitive the process of estimate generation remains.  Nothing made me want to punch a wall, or my coworkers, or my client, more than having to pull together an estimate for a particular scope of work. When estimate generation begins, there is any variety of nuance in the phases, which I certainly won’t cover in detail, but will rather simplify the overarching themes of each phase.  And these are things that exist in both project based estimates and retainers.

• First:  Definition of the Thing
  There is an idea, a need, a specific deliverable determined.  If both parties are lucky, a budget is named, although many a client will insist on seeing an estimate, or multiple estimates, before releasing a budget.  Client’s motivation often stems from concern that an agency will “spend all the budget.”  
  I love it.  

• Second:  Guesswork
  Agency takes first stab at the estimate draft, inserting a myriad of CYA assumptions, guesses, and stipulations, which include, but are not limited to: a finite number of creative reviews, change-order language to address the inevitable change in direction, definitions of what employee titles and corresponding  percentage contributions to the business mean,  and so on and so forth.  And because the agency knows the assumptions won't serve to fully manage client day-to-day when the real work begins, they pad the hell of their hours to account for the guesswork. 
  Again, I love it.  

• Third:  Back-and-Forth, Back-and-Forth
  Now the volley begins.  The estimate is batted back-and-forth for time periods that last anywhere from hours to months, whilst the parties revise, rework, haggle, brow-beat and negotiate one another into submission on line items and their corresponding price tags.  During the volley, team members are raked over the coals in an effort to guesstimate deliverables, contributions, etc., without having all the information, and then when the real work begins, the astounding pressure to "come in on estimate," is damn near insufferable.  
  Total. Frickin’. Madness.  

• Fourth:  The End...Which is Actually the Beginning
  And finally, there is a signature on the dotted line, which is a requirement in the relationship, but is frequently a toss-up as to which party rejoices and which party just feels relief to still be in one piece and/or start the work.
  Priceless.

And so the vicious cycle persists, schizophrenic in its cadence, insane in its rounds of volley, and yet still regarded as the most natural thing to do, even so far as accepting there is no alternative to the rules of engagement.  Once you are in, you are locked in.  And this is where I liken agency estimating to the rules of Fight Club.

• 1st Rule
  Fight Club - You do not talk about FIGHT CLUB.
  Agency - You do not talk about GUESSWORK. 

• 2nd Rule
  Fight Club - You DO NOT talk about FIGHT CLUB.
  Agency - You DO NOT talk about GUESSWORK. 
  

• 3rd Rule
  Fight Club - If someone says "stop", goes limp or taps out the fight is over.
  Agency - If someone says "stop", taps out, or signs the dotted line, estimating is over.

• 4th Rule
  Fight Club - Only two guys to a fight.
  Agency - Only two guys to a fight - Agency Sales Guy and Client.
  

• 5th Rule
  Fight Club - One fight at a time.
  Agency - One estimate at a time, signed in blood. 

• 6th Rule
  Fight Club - No shirts, no shoes.
  Agency - No shirts, no shoes, no trust.

• 7th Rule
  Fight Club - Fights go on as long as they have to.
  Agency - Estimating will go on as long as it has to (but deadlines won't budge).

• 8th Rule
  Fight Club - If this is your first night at FIGHT CLUB, you HAVE to fight.
  Agency - If this is your first ESTIMATE with this client, you MUST give a number, (even if you know you shouldn’t).

So while the signature on the dotted line formally marks the beginning of the relationship, the foundation for the rules of engagement began long beforehand - and each engagement may as well be labeled "Project Mayhem," with destruction on the horizon written into the assumptions.  

How do we evolve the barbaric nature of the relationship into one of humane interaction, honesty and real partnership (all the buzz words that make the pitch presentation)?  

We stop putting price tags on 'things' and we assign value to the team. We structure contracts built for change and we work in smaller, better organized teams and tackle achievable, iterative chunks of work. There are frameworks that achieve this and opportunities to create a new working environment internally within an organization - Agency and Client alike.  And this is how growth in revenue, innovation, new business and generally just moving the fucking needle in the right direction become reality.

And as they say in Fight Club, "This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time."  For agencies, it is ending one estimate at a time.  Ironically - you hold the key to change, and it has quite a lot to do with that first step toward self-awareness.

Narrator (Edward Norton):     You're fucking Marla, Tyler. 
Tyler Durden (Brad PItt):       Uh, technically, you're fucking Marla, but it's all the same to her.

Narrator (Edward Norton):     You're insane. 
Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt):       No, you're insane. 

Strategy: Book Smart v. Street Smart

by Kat Grider

I recently worked at a company where there were over 120 super nerds in the analytics department. Over 95% of them had their Masters in some kind of advanced statistics, number extrapolation and SQL wizardry. And this army of analysts feeds reports to the company strategists.

The strategists are then excellent at developing a well-informed 'roadmap' or theory about what you should do next based on the rear-view mirror of existing data. They walk clients through a power point and hand over their strategic findings and then they kindly take their check and leave. 

But the thing is, these strategists and statisticians rarely ever get in the trenches and actually execute campaign ideas. Those that conduct the focus groups are rarely the ones up at midnight launching the website. 

Too often it's 'book smarts' VS. tactical 'street smarts'. It's Einstein vs. John Wayne. It's your college professor vs. your bookie. It's your brand agency vs your digital agency. One thinks the other is too focused on shotgunning short-term tactics and the other is convinced that their counterpart is always in the middle of some brand-positioning soliloquy.

The truth is they both serve a critical purpose. Book smarts will get you smarter. Street smarts will get you results. But when the two don't play nice you get dumb results and really smart dead-ends. So, how do you get your partners at both ends of the spectrum to play nice and all adhere to the overarching vision of your campaign or project?

Create common ground.

Here's how the Aha Method (my business with Bree) does it:

Establish a framework that puts the research done by your above-the-line agency into meaningful terms for your digital agencies. And when I say framework, I mean that literally. We visually show how  the customer journey (aka purchase funnel) maps against customer segments and against the brand positioning.

Get in the room. Get the CRM agency, the ATL planners and creatives and the digital doers into the same physical location. We outline the key messages and CTAs for specific touchpoints. We create allignment. We develop a tool for  translating book smarts into street smarts and we damn near sing kumbayah when the thing is done.

Your strategic partner (whichever agency that is) should have a tool for doing this. If they don't, they should lie, say they do and then scramble to get this done for you. Or, maybe you have an idea for creating one from scratch. Either way - get started because as John Wayne says, "Life is hard, but it's harder when you're stupid". 

And settling for mediocre results, is, well, stupid.