The Mumbrella360 Manifesto revealed

I echo your sentiments Tim. I thought it was an excellent session from start to finish. (click)
There was a genuine sense of energy, and collaboration in the room, but also healthy & robust debate.
I enjoyed the opportunity to participate and would welcome also the opportunity for further involvement down the track.
With reference to my earlier posting (quoted kindly, thank you Chris), I believe that we were much closer towards the “tipping point” end of the see-saw, but much more obviously needs to now be DONE, as to simply pontificated about.
I hope all those who participated accept Chris’s call to arms.

I think this was a truly brave idea driven by Chris, and I was really pleased with how he/we pulled it off. Two interesting points to note:-

1. Whilst 45 mins was a very challenging timescale to achieve some meaningful statements, it actually is quite liberating and we probably got as far / almost as far as we would have done with months of meetings and debate.

2. In the media owner and media agency relationships stream (which Vicki and I moderated), there were just 3 media agency people compared to approx 25 media owners. Whilst this might be partly a reflection of the make up of Mumbrella conference, it also speaks volumes about where the issue sits in the world of media agencies who are stretched and challenged in so many directions. It will be difficult to achieve better relationships until agencies and media owners learn to better understand what it’s like in the other’s shoes, and until we get some good/professional processes to share information and good briefs.

I was in the social media group and also thought it was a fantastic session.
The energy, ideas and co-operation within the group was incredible and it really felt like everyone was commited to change and to improving the industry.
Well done to Chris and Mumbrella for facilitating and for having the foresight to put this on the table. There was a huge appetite in the room for taking it on. It can only be onwards and upwards from here.

Highlight of the conference Chris and Tim, and a big thank you to all who participated! Now on to finalisation and implementation…..calling out to all who care – please show your support and let us know what next? We now have momentum let’s keep it moving.

What excites me about the outcomes of this session is the alignment behind the need for change. What worries me is that once back at our desks, we go back to business as usual. I don’t want business as usual … I want complete disruption!

First of all I have to agree with the sentiment above on the manifesto session – thoroughly inspiring and one of the best conference experiences I’ve had – well done to all those involved in running it.

Now on to the debate… for me there’s one VERY WORRYING statement here from the social media group, i.e. “We believe social media can deliver success against traditional metrics but shouldn’t be judged by them”.

By “traditional metrics” I assume in large part this means reach and frequency. I was personally lucky enough to sit in the planning group and discuss the issue of media metrics and measurement where we agreed we need a new measure – moving away from R+F towards one based on engagement and behavioural/attitudinal impact (or “influence”). In my view, social media has had a large role in accelerating this need for a new measure. And yet this very statement seems to be saying that it’s ok to judge social media solutions by the traditional metrics when it suits, but also ok when it doesn’t? Surely this is a case of having your cake and eating it too – and has the potential to be counter r/evolutionary?

I would the argue that social specialists in the industry have an even higher duty to help reframe the new metrics – they’re arguably the ones best placed to activate change. Perhaps someone in the group can explain where this statement came from? Very keen to hear the context in which it arose.

it’s not surprising that only 3 media agency people were invloved and 25 media owners. The media owners were probably desperately searching for another portal. Agency people need to put a system in place where someone at least acknowledges receipt of phone messages received. The only way to get the majority of agencies to call is when they want to blast you for calling their clients direct. Why did you call “my” client direct? “because you didn’t return my 10 phone calls..”

Might I add as a “young” media professional, the opportunity to be welcomed to this debate, as well as actively take part in making a difference to the way the industry should unfold, is a truly great thing.
Like the relationships between media owners/media agencies, and clients/media/agency relationships – so too should there be a healthy collaboration of Gen Ys/Gen Xs and Baby Boomers in this movement forward.

Awesome stuff!

Tim, Do Not Call Register is referring to my earlier post specifically about the make up of the group that tackled Media Owner + Agency relationships. Cheers, Rob.

Excellent. With the manifesto now in place, let’s consider voting on an org structure for a secret police force which will implement this drivel.

Also, are we required to recite the manifesto with other members of our team before office hours, or can we do it privately in a quiet moment?

thanks for all the feedback everyone, brilliant stuff. please keep the suggestions coming on what you want to happen now … and if you were in the session and would like to add any context or further suggestions to any of the articles please do so.

@ Richard Dirth – please feel free to utilise the manifesto in any way you like …

Good to see a marked increase in the number of contributors using their real names too….

Yes, thanks Chris. I remember receiving similar advice after Rudd’s 2020 Summit.

Richard Dirth – There are no words for what a tool you are. These guys are trying actively to make a change to the way our businesses operate and behave. Its rare to get a chance for the industry to come together to decide what ‘it’ wants for its future.

Take it or leave it by all means, but why bring such childish negatively into an initiative which is geared purely to positive change.

And breathe…..

We’re watching with interest over in NZ. It looks like a fantastic intiative.

Awesome work Chris and Mumbrella

What are the steps to re-invent the pitch process? How do we make that happen and take the subjectivity out of picking one creative idea over another. Can we replace it with something that will foster and demonstrate brave and collaborative thinking on the part of both client and agency? What comes next……….

Rod Messent:

I was part of the group on the social side, and I take your point about ‘have your cake and eat it too’, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

I feel the idea was an attempt to say, yes social can deliver reach and frequency, any number of big campaigns point to this, but that their true value/success is not determined by that alone.

I would love to have my cake and eat it too, social may well make that possible.

It is also a pragmatic statement, we still need to be able to sell these ideas, if we can help clients see that a good social campaign can deliver on their traditional metrics and more, haven’t we achieved something and helped them move in the right direction?

Chris.

@Alex. OK, I can take that criticism. But can you take a reality check and understand that manifestos, in any form, only achieve longevity, dare I say it, effectiveness, when the words are driven by something which is self-evident to the people who are affected. To to simplify that for you, it wont work as a document scribed by an quorum!
Yes, I could add to the superficial joy and group love filling this page, but I don’t have the time or inclination for self-delusion. Drop the group-think and use your own intuition.