Lions and Tigers enrol for Personality Development Programs

The title is a joke.

When I was much younger, on a couple of occasions, my parents advised me to attend some personality development program. I hated the suggestion back then, I hate it even now (when offered to someone else :)). Mind you, I said 'the suggestion'. What it does mean is that I am not quite averse to the idea of 'personality development'.

Here's a perspective.

One of the popular indicators (only an indicator, no guarantee okay!) of a 'well-developed personality' is felicity with language. So people who are good at talking, at using a range of words, at structuring arguments seem to have a good personality. And this indicator seems to have been used by a lot of institutions and coaching classes to sell their PD programs.

Having observed myself over the years, the one thing that has aided in improving my skills in language is the the actual 'searching for' and 'doing of' things. The more I've tried doing things in a particular domain, the more my need to search for the most effective means to accomplish those things. And of course, searching meant asking the right questions or conveying the right ideas, which in turn means trying to use the words which are most representative of the thoughts in my head and which could be understood in the same manner by the people trying to answer my questions or trying to help me. And learning from this process for the next thing to do.

I've seen quite a few people around me attend the PD programs. Very often, the 'positive change' disappears after a while.The reason is, in all probability, not going through the process of finding more words or a better vocabulary for doing something new/better. Doing it is.

Provogue Brand Symbol and the failed selling effort!

Just going through Ahmedabad Times this morning, I noticed this! What's so special? The symbol! Guess they've only recently introduced it, may be in the last few months.

About 2 years back, we got a chance to pitch to Provogue. The objective was 'to rejuvenate the brand'. Here's what I had presented.

No need to go through the presentation actually. But the point is we didn't win the pitch. We didn't in spite of the fact that one of our important suggestions was to introduce a recognizable symbol. Precisely that! Though of course, the options we presented were different from the one you see here. The incumbent agency back then is still working on the brand.

Two questions:

• Do they really realize the importance of introducing a symbol yet?
• Why weren't we able to sell the logic?

Can't comment on the first question. But the second one is important. It's critical to understand that the person who must've taken the decision to introduce the symbol would be different from the person with whom we were coordinating and who acted as a bridge/filter/link between the decision-maker and 'us'. Guess we never talked with the decision-maker.

Agency's problem is getting to talk with the decision-maker. Getting his attention. Getting his air-time. So another question:

• How important is it for the decision-maker to handle the function of marketing directly?

Your answer is as good as mine.

History (March 1999 - September 2010)

B.Com > PGD in Entrepreneurship & Business Management @ EDII > Sulking for the lost girlfriend > PGD in Communications Management @ MICA > Research Coordinator @ Globus > Center Manager @ T.I.M.E. > Business Analyst-cum-Product Manager @ Flora2000.com > Product Manager @ indiainfo.com > Senior Manager - Planning & Research @ Perspectrum Consultancy > Director - Planning @ Carat Fresh Integrated > Operations Head/Execution Designer @ Krishna Hospital, Bhilwara! :)