I saw an amazing public awareness campaign yesterday.
I came across it first in the bus on the way to work. One of the few overhead ad-panels I’ve ever really cackled at; a cartoonish illustration of a guy wearing a hardhat and a confused expression, with a bloody length of rebar stuck through his head.
“Win an MP3 player and other cool stuff” was written in big letters, along with “Workplace Safety” and “Join the contest and win!”. Highly incongruous and ironic copy given the image. The people next to me were cackling at it too.
I memorized the url on the ad and checked the website as soon as I got to work. And hey - it’s fantastic. Full of craziness and craftiness, and also lessons about workplace safety. It’s really excellent work and I salute whomever made it.
It turns out – as i was informed by my knowledgeable colleagues – that the client,
the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board of Ontario has done this sort of thing before, in a freaky tv campaign called Prevent It, which can be seen on YouTube, here and here.
And what struck me is, “Here, at last, is a client that takes risks!” Hallelujah!
Possibly this is because risk is their stock and trade, and because lives are at stake, but they deserve credit anyway, because intelligent and effective risk-taking in advertising is all too rare in Canada, though in other places, like the UK, it is common. (I mean, who can forget this risque classic?)
Very few clients are willing to take risks, for all kinds of reasons, none of them good, and collectively we suffer for it. And individually those organizations that do not take risks suffer too, losing their edge and their energy, and failing to translate their strategic visions into reality.
Of course risk inevitably involves an element of, well, risk. Whereas when you go for the same-old same-old you can be sure that whatever else happens, you won’t fail. At least not by standing out. But from an organizational perspective that’s risky too, because in the end campaigns fail by not standing out. Everyone has seen that kind of familiar failure, mediocrity tacitly approved, simply because it’s less risky to ignore than to critique.
I think part of the problem is that organizations tend to diffuse risk-taking, and when individuals do go out on a limb and advocate a ‘risky’ strategy, they become vulnerable to scapegoating if - for whatever reason - the execution does not match the original vision. Maybe organizations should have designated ‘risk takers’ who are expected to take risks and aren’t so vulnerable to scapegoating.
Another reason organizations fail to take useful risks is that employees often seem to feel they need to shield their bosses from seeing ‘wacky’ ideas. Whereas, in my experience, the higher up the ladder you go the more open decision-makers are to taking risks, and the greater their ability to see the potential benefits of trying something new. So I guess what I’m saying is that organizations that want to succeed by standing out rather than fail by staying in line need to create a culture of risk-taking that reaches from top to bottom and back up again.
Innovation always includes a measure of risk. But creative, intelligent and targeted risk-taking can produce results that really do the job, that really succeed, and that really matter.
Anything else, as Ontario’s Worker Safety Insurance Board evidently knows, is asking for trouble.
Comments Off
