The Staufenberger Repository

My new brainstorming technique is unstoppable

A while back we invested in a few Dover Publications Clip-Art books in order to pep up the occasional presentation. Despite our preference for things non-Powerpoint, there are occasions when there's no avoiding it. But that's no reason not to make an effort, is it?

Our favourites are the more 80s feeling business titles, like this:

...and this:

...which includes this splendid pipe-smoking chap:

But we've a soft spot for these two, too:

Lot's of outdated home and office gadgets in the former, lots of ladies with big hair, hats and cats in the latter:

Plenty in there to bring a certain something to your next Powerpoint meisterwerk.

Of course, David Rees has used many of these to mirthful effect in his comic strips.

We've been trying to do a plannery equivalent for months, but couldn't think of anything nearly as amusing as Mr Rees' efforts. So this is as far as we've got. (Feel free to have a go yourselves. We might even find a prize for the best submission.)

Looking at it now, I think the blank bubbles do give it different kind of meaning.

From the days when cut and paste meant using something sharp and something sticky, all these images are printed one-sided so that nothing shows through from the reverse when you cut them out to construct your composition. And to help you do that, each book comes with handy instructions inside the back cover:

I think I want an X-Acto knife. It sounds like something from The Incredibles.

The names of things

I bought a book last week.

Not much of an event in itself, but two things struck me as interesting.

The first is that the title alone - glimpsed throught the window as I rushed past a bookshop - was enough to send me back into the shop to investigate. What you call something is important. Really important.

The second was this quotation on the back:

When you think about these four words, they don't really tell you much, do they? It's Gladwell telling us what is presumably a fairly uncontentious piece of information.

Of course, what Gladwell is saying is not the point. The point is that it's Gladwell saying it. Which illustrates how powerful he's become as a signifier for the genre of books that we all love but haven't found a name for.

Book review to follow. Possibly.

Library Thing

Thanks to Rob at no, 2 self we've discovered Library Thing, yet another online, social wotsit. For books. To hang out and meet other books. Obviously.

Not sure if it's any good. Might be. Might not be. But like many of these things, the only way to find out is to dive in and try it. Suck it and see, as they say. So here goes.

Inspired by Rob's ArchiText group, we've started the somewhat less inventively titled planning group, here. 

Our library is far from comprehensive. I just threw in the few books that I could see fom my desk (and left out the ones that didn't quite say the right things about us, obviously). But we'll be adding more titles over the coming weeks.

So feel free to muck in and join the group. The more the merrier. Let's see if it works.

Designers Are Wankers

Actually some of Staufenberger's best friends are designers, including Lee McCormack (designer of The Oculas) who gave us a copy of his new book, Designers Are Wankers. Aside from having a cool title the book comes from a very different place than the usual coffee table design books that stuff the shelves of Magma. 

Lee studied product design but was amazed at how little was taught about the business of design.  His book is an attempt to bridge that gap.  Chapters include 'how to relate to the business mind', talking to venture capitalists  as well as the fundamentals of patents and non-disclosure agreements.  There are also some interviews with leading designers including typographer Neville Brody and fashion entrepreneur Paul Smith. 

The book got me thinking about the lack of knowledge the other way.  How many Goldman Sachs bankers or McKinsey consultants truly understand creativity.  If the future of business in western economies is going to be dominated by ideas maybe it's time someone wrote 'Business People Are Wankers'. 

"A little bit of dirt never hurt anyone"

Been catching up on some reading recently, including this interesting little number about how things fall under the sway of fashion.

Lieberson looks at how the popularity of certain names changes over time and deduces some general principles of how things move from being unchanging customs to changing fashions: clothes, decor, manners, scientific research and so on. And what influences the changes once they become fashions. All of which feels kind of relevant to helping brands become - and stay - popular.

He concludes there are three groups of influences:

1. External events (such as technological advances, industrialisation, economic depression and so on).
2. Internal mechanisms (the most obvious of which are the forces of differentiation and immitation amongst different social groups).
3. Idiosyncratic historical developments.

The example he gives of this last type of influence is the way that Adolf is no longer considered as a name; its meaning had been "contaminated". This concept of contamination - as opposed to something we might spout like, say, "significant negative associations" - seemed a potentially interesting way of looking at brands and led to some heated debate at Staufenberger Towers.

We started thinking of other types of contamination.

Personalities: one of Team Staufenberger's current pin-ups, Robert McKee, points out that the fictional characters we most engage with are those that reveal their failings, imperfections and unappealing traits. It's more honest and makes them more believable. Conversely, we've all met people who just feel too nice.

Our bodies: there's loads of bacteria swimming around our bodies. Some of this is potentially very harmful, such as certain strains of meningitis, some of it is necessary for a healthy digestive system (recently rebranded as "friendly bacteria").

Air: oxygen makes up just 20% of the air we breathe. Admittedly, the rest of it isn't harmful but if the non-harmful proportion gets too big we're in trouble.

OK, we might be stretching the parallel here, but you get the idea. 

The point is, in many quite fundamental areas humans thrive in, or are drawn to, things that are imperfect. Why should the same not be true of brands?

Yet in the process of managing brands - and their meaning - there are many voices telling us to remove all negatives, all contamination. Which, perhaps, isn't particularly realistic (link to Grant McC courtesy of Russel D).

But as anyone who's ever had to pick a name for a child will tell you, there very few without an existing - or potential - negative.

Perhaps we should learn to embrace some imperfection.