Hi friend – Rob here.

Today on Salmon Theory+: a summary of 'Creative Mischief', by Dave Trott.

It's a phenomenal book in that it's phenomenally practical – a rare feat in this industry.

Dave has a fantastic way of breaking things down into simple language we all can understand.

And that, in and of itself, is how you get good at this business, by talking like real people do (or as close as you can!).

Let's get into it.

📝 TL;DR:

1. Am i learning something new, or am i being entertained?
2. Does it create desire? Does it make it acceptable?
3. Your brand isn't what you say it is, it's what people say it is
4. If your work isn't crystal clear in someone else's head, it won't be for your customers either
5. Evaluate what the work is doing, before dissecting what it's meant to be doing
6. Decide what's fixed, flexible and fundamental about the work
7. Be a polyamorous strategist

1. Am i learning something new, or am i being entertained?

Oftentimes we demonise things that feel binary, well Dave Trott makes a virtue out of them.

He had that famous video about binary briefs (which i love), but here is again keeping things very simple.

• Am i learning something new?
• Have i been entertained?

This is typically true for most good advertising (the resurgence of humour is no coincidence), but also our own media diets.

Think about when you do research for a project, and there's tons of tabs and after a while you don't know what to do with it.

Before you even get to nailing down your flow, consider those two questions: is it new? Is it entertaining?

"Is it new?" matters because you want to find an edge that others have not.

"Is it entertaining?" matters because you're looking for things that feel memorable, or at least a bit odd.

If you combine the two, then you're more likely to get to a good strategic argument, instead of just going in with stuff.

There's a reason most of us talk about interesting things by saying "you know what's funny about this...".

It doesn't mean everything you do needs to be funny.

But it certainly needs to be memorable, and funny is one way in.

After all, we entertain for commercial gain, as Orlando Wood famously said.

2. Does it create desire? Does it make it acceptable?

This one is much closer to how people make decisions, specifically around the stuff they buy.

And again, here's that seemingly simplistic binary distinction being extremely useful.

Sure, we can wax lyrical until the end of times about how there's a multitude of factors around why people buy things.

But this again breaks it down in simple terms your mum could understand:

1. Do i want it?
2. Can i have it?

What's interesting is that this works for adverts themselves (especially if you're on persuasion mode), but also propositions.

After all, when you think about a proposition you need to be very clear on the functional benefit, as well as the emotional one.

The more you can do this work upfront, the sharper your proposition becomes.

Two examples based on a brief i wrote ages ago.

Starting point: "The EV car for the whole family". Low desire (like any other car), low permission (no tension, no resolution).

Final result: "The sidekick for perfectly imperfect families". High desire (make my life easy), high permission (i feel SEEN).

We must remember that desire without permission is arthouse, and that's not what good advertising is.

But permission without desire is plain wallpaper, and that's not how good advertising works.

Do i want it?

Can i have it?

Two extremely underrated questions for any piece of work we do.

3. Your brand isn't what you say it is, it's what people say it is

We often fall on this trap when working on pure 'brand awareness' campaigns.

We assume the brand is what we say it is, based on some onion, house or key.

And while that gives you good direction, that's not what the brand is.

It may be what you want it to be, but it's not that just yet.

Y'see, a brand isn't what you say it is, it's what people say it is.

I once did focus groups in Birmingham, to talk about a chocolate brand.

The same type of comment came up over and over.

"It's been different since they were bought by the Americans."

They still had positive associations, but also deep reservations.

The brand was seen as a sellout. were seen as sellouts.

So if you bought them, you might feel like a sellout too.

And we had to acknowledge that in order to move things forward.

The good news is that this brand has reversed their fortunes and are doing quite well.

The point is: you must recognise current perceptions, before understanding where to take things next.

And if you think your category is too functional or low consideration, consider this.

Branded toilet paper sales tend to go up ahead of Christmas.

Why?

Because you're having people over for dinner and don't want to look cheap.

No shit.

4. If your work isn't clear in someone's head, it won't be for customers either

This one feels like something that a) i've not seen before b) i really want to see more of.

Of course, there is a catch: the person who did the work wants to present their work. It's simply our ego talking.

At the same time, there's a sense of needing to let go of your ego that we should appreciate with this exercise.

That is, sure, you want to present your work, but the real endgame is whether the idea is clear for passersby.

And that's where this trick comes in handy

Because you see, i don't believe the biggest skill in marketing is creativity.

No, it's something much more important, albeit less sexy.

Perspective.

Both internal (why are we doing this?) and external (who are we doing this for?).

And this is a brutally simple, even if uncomfortable, way of doing it.

​

5. Evaluate what the work is doing, before dissecting what it's meant to be doing

This one is somewhat similar to the other one, but it's about one step before you show the work.

And he's right: why should we look at the brief first?

Of course, to remind ourselves of what we're doing (perspective).

But at the same time, this creates an unnecessary level of nuance that doesn't help.

That's right, i said it and i meant it: fuck nuance.

(Not my words.)

So consider not looking at the brief and just looking at the work in isolation.

Even better, do it while simulating different types of media environments and contexts:

• While walking past the screen
• While scrolling your phone
• While doing both at the same time!

By being so knowledgeable about the brief, we start warping the reality around the work.

We have so much in our heads, that we get too much in our own heads.

So, similar to how you detox your gut for healthier results, consider this.

Detox your creative mind by only looking at the brief later.

6. Decide what's fixed, flexible and fundamental

I've met one too many strategy directors who believe their role is to direct the ideas.

Now, counter to my previous note (everything's a paradox), we do need some nuance here.

Our job isn't to decide which ideas are best.

It's to help decide which ideas work best.

What that means is that our job isn't to control the work, it's to facilitate its development.

It's more about channelling energy than trying to own it all yourself.

To be a "creative midwife", as Will Humphrey once told me.

For this to work, we need to be more flexible about our briefs too.

Don't make your briefs about what should go into the work.

Instead, be relentlessly focused on what people should take out.

And then, you have a simple set of questions that become the constraints:

1. What's fixed about this? (e.g. a product proof / benefit)
2. What's flexible about this? (e.g. a media plan, especially if very early stages)
3. What's fundamental? (e.g. distinctive brand assets)

If you're the custodian of the 3 Fs around a brief, you'll be well on your way.

That's how you hold the floor without creating an invisible ceiling for creativity.

7. Be a polyamorous strategist

Last, but by no means least, let's talk about momentum and specialisation.

I believe there's two ways of looking at momentum in this industry:

• You move fast in order to go deeper
• You move fast in order to go wider

I'm assuming the moving fast is the consistent factor, because let's be honest – speed counts these days.

But what you're moving towards is where the kicker really comes in.

If you move fast to go deeper, you face strong career prospects in the short run.

You're across all the TikTok trends, sure, but that only gets you so far.

Because you're at the risk of over-specialising.

But if you move fast to go wider, you face much healthier career prospects in the long run.

You're across the faster parts of culture, but also more fundamental undercurrents.

So, water logic matters, but it equally matters where you see yourself flowing into.

I believe strategists don't try enough things, we get too focused in our ways.

We have our beliefs of how brands work, and that's always our answer every time.

(Looking at you, Byron maximalists. Btw, no shade! I love his work. But variety in discourse matters.)

And yet, you see different models emerging all the time, and exceptions that break the rule.

You see strategists who want to build stuff, not just make meaning, in order to learn about business.

Or who are not afraid to try a whole new process (e.g. emergent strategy practices) just to see where it goes.

That's water logic.

That's how you deal with the industry's uncertainty.

By being flexible to the task at hand.

The Shinto belief system talks about "believing in 8 million gods".

Which ones are yours?

How do you keep adding to the roster?

📝 TL;DR:

1. Am i learning something new, or am i being entertained?
2. Does it create desire? Does it make it acceptable?
3. Your brand isn't what you say it is, it's what people say it is
4. If your work isn't crystal clear in someone else's head, it won't be for your customers either
5. Evaluate what the work is doing, before dissecting what it's meant to be doing
6. Decide what's fixed, flexible and fundamental about the work
7. Be a polyamorous strategist