The Importance of Creativity in Education

Posted on by
Reply

I recently wrote an article for London Business Matters magazine, for Aprils edition. I’ve put it up here so it easy for everyone to read as it a subject I think requires some attention. Paul.

I run a design agency in the City, and at the very heart of everything we do is creativity. It’s why clients pick up the phone and ask us to solve their problems – creativity is the fuel that drives us forward. So when Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove wanted to push creative subjects to the sidelines in his proposed EBacc shake-up of GCSE education, it was only natural for the creative industries to start jumping up and down making a lot of noise. Fortunately with pressure from movements like #IncludeDesign and Bacc For the Future, Gove was forced to backtrack on some of his proposals.

I admire Gove. I really like some of the work he is doing and the fact that he has ambitious plans. I like that he is prepared to fail if it means shaking up the status quo but I don’t agree with the centre of his strategy that our children should learn the ‘basics’ and only once these have been mastered should they then progress onto such things as exploring. His rationalethat education should be a two stage process: firstly building up a reservoir of knowledge;then getting creative and imaginative with these basics.

I completely agree that our children should be able to read, write, spell, add, subtract, multiply, read Shakespeare, draw with Pythagoras, test Darwin’s theory and understand Einstein’s theory of relativity – but I do not agree these should be taught like a 1950sthrowback to basics whilst stopping the student from actually thinking. Students should be encouraged to test, explore and innovate as they learn the basics. We shouldn’t be afraid of letting them fail as they explore, and what drives this exploration? Creativity. The greatest minds in the world once thought the world was flat, but this status quo was challenged and disproven. Britain is only going to be the nation to discover the cure for cancer, developaffordable green energy technology or design the next iPhone if we encourage creativity.

Britain is not going to produce the next Prof Brian Cox, Sir James Dyson or Sir Jony Ive if our children are churned out with the just the ‘basics’. As an employer I want graduates to have had a well-rounded and balanced education. If they don’t have the basics nailed they are going to struggle to cope with a fast-paced, changeable and innovation-led business, but if they haven’t been encouraged to think creatively, to challenge the status quo then howshould we expect them to do it when employed. Creativity should be ingrained, coming naturally to a school-leaver or graduate.

Do the numbers stack up? There are a number of companies that place more than lip service to creativity by placing it at the heart of their business: Apple, Google, ARM, Dyson, andAmazon as well as London firms such as Huddle, OpenGamma, Hotels.com, Fianium, Foster+Partners – all truly innovative companies that encourage creativity and are generatingserious revenues. The government’s own Tech City is a prime example of the types of businesses that put creativity at their heart, at the last count some 40,000 businesses all crammed around a roundabout.

As one might expect from a designer I have a particular interest in keeping Design & Technology as a core subject within the curriculum. Gove and his team tried to kick D&T to the curb though, hopefully, the great work from Joe Macleod at #IncludeDesign has put a stop to that and the Government consultation ends in April so it’s all hands to the pump at the moment. I want to see a properly structured, relevant, rigorous and meaningful curriculum. Clearly creative skills are a fundamental element of D&T, but as with all important and core subjects the creative and problem-solving skills encouraged in D&T are used in Maths, English and Science. Bel Reed at the Design Council has developed five principles of design education which I fully support as they clearly demonstrate the transferable skills of D&T.http://blog.designcouncil.org.uk/2013/02/27/the-5-principles-of-design-education/

The best schools are the ones whose teachers are allowed to get on and teach. So my message to Michael Gove is: keep doing the many things you’re better than anybody else at doing but don’t get your prescription pad out to give the wrong medicine to the education system. Let teachers create an environment of exploration – a beautiful blend of knowledge and creativity. As Einstein said: “Imagination is more important than knowledge”.

Paul Mellor is design director at Mellor & Scott

Firefox Enters the Race

Posted on by
Reply

So yesterday the 24th Feb – prior to the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona – Mozilla announced the launch of its Firefox operating system for mobile. Its pretty late on the scene and it’s not just any scene but a bloody battlefield with some of the worlds biggest heavyweights having it right out in front of everyone, but Mozilla clearly feel they have something different to Apple, Android, Blackberry, Windows, et all.

So whats different you ask? Well Mozilla are positioning this as an operating system with true open web standards at its heart – the very essence of Mozilla’s brand has been focussed and driven into a mobile OS that uses html 5 as a user facing proposition. A very commendable undertaking, because developing an OS that doesn’t step on anyone’s toes (those heavyweights have very large and sensitive toes!) whilst delivering a user experience that the users actually like is a very difficult task.

We haven’t checked out the OS yet, but we like the relative simpliicity of the core value. If its aligned with Open Web Standards then it’s in, if it’s not then it’s out. As you would expect a smashingly nondescript exectuive has come out with some crap,

“Every device is better if it’s social and we’re excited that Firefox OS users will have easy access to the mobile Web-based version of Facebook that will take advantage of our current and future features,” said Vaughan Smith, VP of Mobile Partnerships at Facebook.”

But what really actually counts is the following;

1. Does it deliver as promised?

2. Is it different?

3. Is it disruptive?

4. Can I work it intuitively from the first moment I pick up a device?

We’ll know the answers to these questions fairly soon and we’ll be reporting our thoughts. Until then, its over and out

Mel

 

Mellor&Scott continues to discuss Ebacc with Michael Fallon MP

Posted on by
Reply

Some of you will have seen the email conversation between Mellor&Scott and Michael Fallon over the last couple of weeks. The emails below are an update to the discussions. Let us know what you think and remember you can sign the #IncludeDesign petition here

EMAIL 7
From: Michael Fallon
To: Paul Mellor
Date: 18 January 2013, 14.38pm
Subject: Re, Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Dear Mr. Mellor,

Thank you for writing.

There is a finite amount of time that schools have in their timetables. Therefore more time spent on one subject inevitably means there is less time for others. As such the Government wishes to focus on delivering the basics first. As such I think we are in violent agreement – we both want to make sure children have the right skills and those skills are the core academic ones rather than the vocational.

I do not claim to be an expert on education; on that I must defer to my colleagues at the Department for Education. However, I recognise the importance of having schools teach what businesses value and one way we are doing this is through the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) which brings councils and businesses together. LEPs will have a new role in setting skills strategies for their local area and we are encouraging LEPs to have a seat on FE colleges’ governing bodies, with colleges represented on LEP boards. LEPs’ skills priorities will be published to help potential learners choose the right course or training programme. I would suggest, given your passion for education, that you may be interested in the work of the South East LEP (http://www.southeastlep.com/) which covers the Sevenoaks area.

Best wishes,

Michael Fallon
__________

EMAIL 8
From: Paul Mellor
To: Michael Fallon
Date: 21 January 2013, 14.23pm
Subject: Re, Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Mr Fallon,

Thank you for your email.

We both want children to be given the best education to start their careers but we differ in our approach, if you think this means we are in ‘violent agreement’ then so be it – I disagree.

The ‘basics’ can be taught without the need to reduce other important subjects. Unfortunately it is an easy and potentially lazy argument to make that ‘more time spent on one subject inevitably means there is less time for others’.

You are the Minister for Business and Enterprise, above all else I would expect you to know what UK businesses expect from the education system. It is not my job to get involved with organisations such as the LEP’s as you suggest (I have previously been involved in college and FE education). It is your job to have your finger on the pulse of the UK economy, and with this specific issue, feedback these views to the Department of Education.

Perhaps we should meet to discuss this in more detail, as I believe this to be a very large problem and one that needs to be addressed immediately.

Paul Mellor

Mellor&Scott continues to talk to Michael Fallon MP (update)

Posted on by
Reply

We have an update on the continued conversation with Michael Fallon regards the proposed changes to the education system and the removal of the creative subjects from the new Ebacc. Remember you can sign up to the #IncludeDesign petition here

See below for the emails.

EMAIL 5:

From: <FALLON>, Michael <michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk>
Date: Monday, 14 January 2013 15:27
To: Paul Mellor
Subject: RE: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Dear Mr. Mellor,

Thank you for writing.

I am glad you welcome the Government’s focus on a core academic education.

The point about the poorest students was these are the students who have often been let down most by the present system. Instead of being given high expectations and challenged to meet them, lower-achieving students have often been encouraged to undertake the ‘softer’ qualificationcations instead. This is not a problem faced by middle-class children whose parents typically push them harder and insist on them doing subjects like science and maths. Hence the poorest children suffer particularly badly if core academic subjects are not mandatory.

Therefore whilst I recognise your concerns about a lack of creativity in the curriculum, you must realise that this is a trade-off: the more time given to non-c non-core subjects, the less time available for core-subjects. The 80/20 split is therefore arbitrary, but the Government thinks this is about right to ensure there is provision of the academic essentials and scope to learn other subjects as well.

Kind regards,

Michael Fallon

__________

EMAIL 6:
From: Paul Mellor
Date: Tuesday, 15 January 2013 20:08
To: ”FALLON, Michael” <michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk>
Subject: Re: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Mr Fallon,

I welcome any focus on core academic skills as these are a proven requirement to the future career of that student.

I do not agree with the rationale that by focusing on a number of important core subjects you must therefore reduce the time spent on other ‘non-core’ subjects, this is not the correct action in order to lift standards overall. You and the Government have unfortunately missed the important point that a well rounded and evenly balanced education is the best course of action, this is the most inclusive method and the one that will best prepare each student for their future either in work, apprenticeship or higher education.

It is possible to make core subjects mandatory and give enough time to each historically important subjects – I do not consider the more vocational subjects within these parameters. I do not believe that the 80/20 split is ‘about right’. There are too many subjects to be crammed into that time, which inevitably means each will suffer.

I feel I am better placed than you to make an assessment on what the UK’s businesses owners want from students applying for jobs. I negotiate, trade, liaise and most importantly talk to business owners all day everyday. Almost without exception the business owners I know want well-rounded, balanced education and your actions will do a disservice to the UK’s economy and specifically the UK’s (world-leading) Creative Industries.

I support a number of the decisions this Government has had to take over the last 2 years, but I urge you to reconsider your position, you are not best placed to make these judgements about what output UK business want from our education system.

Please tell me what you can do to reassess this position.

Regards

Paul Mellor

Mellor&Scott talks to Michael Fallon MP

Posted on by
Reply

Mellor&Scott have signed the #IncludeDesign petition, calling on Michael Gove and the Government to include creative subjects as a sixth pillar of the proposed changes to our education system, in the new Ebacc.

You can see from the email exchange that unfortunately my local MP – Michael Fallon – doesn’t agree with all my points within our argument, which is a shame as he is the Minister of State for Business and Enterprise in the department of Business, Innovation and Skills, so whilst this is an immediate education issue it affects the future of creative businesses as a whole. So it is imperative we as an industry keep up the pressure on the Government and make our voice heard. You can sign the petition here, you’ll see some well-know names from the international design industry.

I’ll update with any further responses I receive from Mr Fallon.

Email 1:

Date: Friday, 21 December 2012 12:09
To: “michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk” <michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk>
Subject: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Dear Mr Fallon,

REF: The proposed removal of Creative Education in the new Ebacc

I am writing to you as there is significant concern among the creative industry about the current pressures on design and creative education, and the effect this could have on the industry and the wider economy.

The UK has a well-deserved international reputation for design and creativity, but lack of investment in creative education at all levels could undermine this status, and leave the UK’s creative sector under threat from international competitors.

One issue of particular concern at present is the omission of creative subjects from the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) league table and ‘full EBacc’ certificate.

As it stands at the moment, the EBacc places significant pressure on schools to focus on just five ‘pillars’ of study: maths, English, sciences, languages and humanities (defined as just history and geography). These are important, but the omission of creative subjects threatens a broad and balanced education (the International Baccalaureate for example includes a sixth creative pillar).

I run Mellor&Scott a design agency in the city, as a sideline to the business I am involved in design education in a number of London’s schools, colleges and some of the countries Universities. I am therefore well placed to assess the damage that this move would create to the countries creative industry, and our national economic growth.

Alongside 240 other organisations we signed the Bacc for the Future Education letter that was sent to Michael Gove, which advocates a sixth pillar of creative subjects for the EBacc.

As Minister of State for Business and Enterprise and my local Member of Parliament (I live in Sevenoaks), I ask that you do everything in your power to secure the place of creative industry-relevant subjects in a sixth pillar of study such as ‘art and design, dance, drama, design technology, film studies and music.’ This is what the Government’s own Henley Review recommended.

This travesty cannot be allowed to happen. Yours Sincerely

Paul Mellor

__________

EMAIL 2

Sent: 11 January 2013 14:11

To: FALLON, Michael

Subject: Re: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Mr Fallon,

I have not received a reply from you regards my email below, sent on 21st December 2012. I am a Sevenoaks constituent so I would like to know your thoughts on the proposed removal of Creative Education from the new Ebacc.

Regards,

Paul Mellor

__________

EMAIL 3:

From: <FALLON>, Michael <michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk>
Date: Friday, 11 January 2013 15:21
To: Paul Mellor
Subject: RE: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Dear Mr. Mellor,

Thank you for taking the time to write and I let me apologise for the delay.

The purpose of the EBacc is to encourage schools and pupils to focus on core academic subjects which are so highly valued by employers and universities. The aim is to reverse a long-term and damaging drift away from the subjects most likely to lead to higher education and good jobs.

As such, the EBacc is deliberately designed to get students to switch into more traditional subjects from more creative ones. The Government believes that this actually benefits, rather than harms, the poorest pupils who will now pushed towards core subjects that will serve them better in the long run. It does children no favours to allow them to acquire qualifications that do not teach them further skills or are not recognised by employers.

This government is in no doubt of the importance of creativity; however our education system must, at a minimum, provide the basic knowledge students need and this is what the EBacc delivers. We believe it is right to emphasise the core academic subjects. However, the Ebacc curriculum will not take up all of schools’ teaching time, leaving 20% of it free in which to pursue the sort of education you advocate.

Yours sincerely,

Michael Fallon

__________

EMAIL 4:

From: Paul Mellor
Date: Friday, 11 January 2013 15:50
To: ”FALLON, Michael” <michael.fallon.mp@parliament.uk>
Subject: Re: Creative Education in the new Ebacc

Mr Fallon,
Thank you for your prompt response today, apology accepted.
I fully accept and agree that schools should be allowed to encourage pupils to focus on core academic subjects, they are indeed skills that are highly valued by employers. As a business owner and employer I applaud your aim to reverse the long term shift away from core subjects into vocational subject areas. Many of the students and graduates I meet don’t have the core educational skills that I deem a pre-requisite to gaining employment.
I find your mention of the ‘poorest’ students surprising, this should have nothing to do with money or social status, this is about finding the best method of equipping every student with all the tools for their future careers. The approach that you advocate excludes certain skills therefore it cannot be deemed inclusive.
I agree with Mr Gove’s strategy that schools should be given more freedom, I think the academy schools programme is proof that this approach can be successful as it gives our most talented teachers the freedom to do what they do best. However my understanding is that there are quite a few of the so called non-core subjects to be fitted into the 20% allowance you mention and no matter how talented the teaching staff this is just not enough time.
I think your reforms have the best of intentions but this approach is some way off from giving all students the best start to their careers. What do you suggest could be done to improve these reforms?
Regards
Paul Mellor 

Covent Garden Soup Delisted

Posted on by
Reply
Last week New Covent Garden Soup (NCG) was delisted by Tesco. So what, not a big deal, I hear you say? Not only is this a big deal for Daniels Group (NCG is their biggest brand by a mile) but this will have put the willies up every single brand owner currently selling into a supermarket.

 

I’m not talking about the Unilever and P&G’s of this world, I’m thinking more about the brands that sell the majority of their £50-100m worth of product into the big 4 supermarkets. Perhaps brands like;
Onken Yogurt
Rachel’s Yogurt
Jordan’s Cereal
Ella’s Kitchen
Cathedral City

 

And that’s only me thinking for 30 seconds – there are hundred’s.

 

Each one of these brands is a large, well-known and perceivably robust business – wrong they are dependant on 1 or more of the supermarkets to keep buying their product. The negotiations between brand owner and supermarket buyer have always been weighted in the favour of the supermarket with some supermarkets (Tesco 2000-2010) leveraging that mismatched pairing to a greater degree than their competitors. In the background their was always the threat that the supermarket would de-list the brand but it wasn’t at the forefront of the negotiations so brand owners didn’t fear it as much as they should have.

 

Let me tell you, every negotiation between brand owner and supermarket has taken on a new dynamic since NCG was delisted.

 

Picture the scene, lets imagine your are the senior account manager at the established hotdog company ‘Doggers’, you leave the office with the words ringing in your ears from your Head of Sales “don’t you dare lose that account”, you’re sat in the meeting with the Hotdog buyer at Super M’s (the biggest supermarket in the country and your largest customer), he says he wants you to lower your price, you say it’s as low as Doggers can go, he says the sales for Super M’s own-brand hotdog are doing really well and he thinks customers don’t buy into the brand value of Doggers as much as you believe, you retort that Doggers packaging has a planned refresh next year, he says that Super M is always looking for the best value and they believe their own brand hot dogs can be sexed up, he slips into conversation look at what Tesco did with their own-brand soups when they de-listed Covent Garden Soup, you realise you’re about to loose £20m in sales so you drop your price to keep the account, now its only £18m in sales but Super M’s have improved their margin by 5%.

 

This isn’t going to happen, it is happening now.

 

Pre-empt the obvious scenario by actually thinking about your product, packaging, brand, marketing and the effectiveness of your comms. I mean really think about it, don’t just say the words, actually spend some bloody time and think long and hard about your proposition otherwise losing a £20m account will be the least of your problems as Doggers will be out of business and you’ll be looking for a new job.

 

Meanwhile we’ll be going into the dogging business

The Advent of Couch Commerce

Posted on by
Reply

E-consultancy (the fantastic resource of all things digital and commerce) has published some startling research about peoples shopping habits whilst using their tablets.

The research predict that 119 million tablets will be sold in 2012, 70% of them will be iPads. This will give rise to 169.6 million iPad sales in 2016, say that number again – 169.6 million.

They predict that the effect on e-commerce will be huge, there has already been a 348% increase in traffic from tablets in one year.

Tablets have grown to account for 6.52% of all website visits in 2012, which doesn’t sound lot but Desktops visits has dropped below the magic 90% mark for the first time to 88.12%. With the predicted explosion of tablet sales these numbers are sure to continue on this trend and we will eventual see tablet visit numbers in the 50% region…..MASSIVE NEWS.

But the research that gives all of this context for the marketing man is that 96% of users currently shop on their tablet whilst sitting on the couch. The question to ask is what other thing do most people spend their time doing whilst on the couch (only clean thoughts count!), the answer is watch TV. So we have a captive audience sat on the couch watching Madmen (other TV shows are available) and you have these same people doing the huge majority of their online shopping (on the only device they will own) whilst watching the TV. This as they say is a marketing man’s dream!

The brands that apply some proper creative thought into how they are going to leverage more sales from this perfect storm are the ones who will make the most cash – the possibilities are endless. Get in first and you steal market share – big market share. We at Mellor&Scott have already got a few ideas we’ll be pitching to a client or two.

Paul

 

Window Bashing

Posted on by
Reply

The Windows 8 preview is here and apparently we can expect a second preview in June this year.

How do we feel about it? Well I can’t say I’m too impressed from what we’ve seen so far. First of all let’s cut to the chase, Microsoft is not the power house it once was and has half the market capitalisation of its eternal rival Apple (yet still dominates the PC market in terms of volume). Therefore Windows 8 is going to have to be a game changer in terms of experience and functionality for it to regain lost ground and ultimately some customer traction against Apple & Samsung is the future Smartphone/Tablet wars.

Historical elements such as the ‘Start’ button have gone and along with the tab system along the bottom, it’s very close to the remarkably well reviewed Windows Mobile OS. However I feel they have missed the point of the digital lifestyle with gaudy colours and an ‘App Jigsaw’. You don’t have to be bullish to create something new and different and that’s the trap Microsoft’s top guys have fallen into, it looks like they are trying to be different for the sake of it rather than really considering what their beleaguered yet still massive influential customers actually want.

They want a User Experience that is compelling and intuitive but most of all they want to find hidden surprises – this is what the customer wants. Yeah sure they will be content with an integrated system that allows them to switch easily from playing FIFA on their Xbox to sitting infront of a desktop to then hunching over the phone on Facebook for some good honest stalking. But they expect that as a matter of course and it shouldn’t be your driving force and listening to Windows President Steven Sinofsky and looking at the preview you get the feeling that creating an ‘integrated system’ was their goal and unfortunately that isn’t going to get the public’s juices going.

An integrated system with the same navigation and UI across their hardware is very Apple, yet Microsoft seem to have failed to hit the right note because they weren’t doing it for the right reason. They were doing it to create one look-n-feel as opposed to thinking about creating some magic and giving their customers a stify.

I expected more as the noises coming out of the Windows team and Microsoft over the last couple of years after Windows Mobile OS have been encouraging.

Their other big problem is Nokia and no matter how good your relaunch’s are, if you’re stood on the deck next to Captain Nokia on the Titanic you’re only ever going to sink. A partnership with Nokia is strategic suicide.

Have a smashing day, Paul

A Budget for Good Business

Posted on by
Reply

This week saw Chancellor George Osborne’s third budget announcement, unfortunately although announced with much fanfare, the majority of the headlines measures had been leaked to selected press prior to Wednesday. However it certainly was a Business Friendly Budget and ‘Unashamedly backed business and aspiration’ – GOOD.

It’s not my normal stance to write about politics as you will always inadvertently piss somebody off and others will get the wrong end of my stick, but these are two issues that regardless of which political party you support I think should be supported by us all as they provide support to businesses and therefore HELP EVERY employed person in the UK.

The two measures I’m talking about are the reduction in Corporation Tax and the 50p tax rate moved to 45p – both of which are good for UK businesses.

Corporation tax coming down 1% immediately and then staying at 22% from 2014 is a great step in the right direction. Of course there are few other taxation elements that need to be addressed which is why some business leaders have still got their knickers in a twist – such as the business tax of 5.6 per cent and lower allowances in capital investment. But overall the corporation tax reduction should be widely accepted as good thing. It allows businesses more flexibility to invest in infrastructure, people, and expansion or at the very least put it into their reserves should they hit troubled waters – therefore helping to protect jobs.

Reducing the 50p top rate to 45p again is another sound business move – of course the acquisition from Labour politicians was ‘why cut the top rate of tax when the rest of the population are struggling?’ and they do have a point to an extent however it is perverse to tax rich people just because we can, the evidence over the last 100 years shows us that lower tax levels actually increase the GDP of an economy thus making it easier to do business in a country. I felt Labour’s response was almost tribal rather than actually considering what message the 50p rate sends to business leaders across the world. We live in a world of high mobilisation and if you penalise too highly or what they consider disproportionately then they will just live somewhere else and take their tax revenue with them. The world has changed in the last 10 years and politicians have to consider these differences when making tax law in the 21st Century.

Obviously I set up Mellor&Scott 3 years ago in the middle of a recession and both of these measures are wholeheartedly supported as a step in the right direction. Hopefully the Chancellor will be supported in a year’s time with how business has reacted to these measures and will be encouraged to go further with even more business friendly measures.

Until then, let’s crack on and work hard!

Paul Mellor, Design Director

Communication is King

Posted on by
Reply

James Hutchinson’s wrote a piece in CityAM’s Forum on Monday called Chief executives earn trust with honest answers, in which it’s highlighted that EDF’s top man Vincent de Rivaz recently gave an interview and mentioned the word ‘trust’ 61 times. He pointed out that De Rivaz had not made his company any more trusted, potentially making it less trusted.

This story rings true on many levels….when speaking to Marketing, Communication and Brand Directors at UK Plc unsurprisingly all of them are trying to make their brand, product or service cut through the noise to differentiate from their competitors.

Some are much better than others when discussing their companies values – much in the same way that De Rivaz was trying to do – sometimes they get out a PowerPoint presentation, there is often a smashing graph with all the lines going up and they always start rolling out the company ‘values’. Unfortunately there are three words that make it onto a lot of Plc’s values – Trust, Honesty and Innovation.

Think about those three words for a minute…Just like De Rivaz I’d say over a third of the brand owners I speak to say their brand is trustworthy, “trust us with your money/insurance/health/electricity”, Joe Public expects you to be Trustworthy as a prerequisite and I certainly don’t trust anyone because they tell me they’re Trustworthy.

A company is no more honest if it says its honest, for example Enron in the 90’s was still telling us it was a company with integrity. Innovation is possibly the worst of these value’s for a CEO to spin out when trying to communicate the company message, I think over 50% of the brand owners I speak to claim to have innovative companies – they can’t all be innovating! Perversely the less you promote your innovation the more innovate you actually are, for example Apple – a very innovative company – doesn’t promote it’s innovation.

A recent example of this is, Ian Shepherd at Game Group, whose shares are priced at less than a penny, when quizzed about what he was doing to get Game out of its current predicament instead of saying we are listening to what customers want and we’re going to give it to them, he started attacking the game producers for not giving him credit facilities to buy the latest consoles, that is no way to engender you to Joe Public – especially when you need all the help you can find.

Forget about company ‘values’, don’t tell consumers what you want them to think (as they’re far to clever for you) – instead tell them what you’re actually doing and then let them make up their up own mind. This is the quickest way to build trust and make your company ‘likeable’ – you can then sit back safe in the knowledge that you’re going to watch your share price go through the roof.

Paul