Amy Williams, Jeremy Clarkson and the Assimilation-Contrast Effect

Ever heard of the Assimilation-Contrast Effect?

Kevin Keohane introduced me to this fascinating idea earlier in the year, which is grounded in Social Judgement Theory, developed by Muzafer Sherif and Carl Hovland in the ‘60s.

Basically, the idea is that, when confronted by potential conflict, individuals or groups will tend to approach it with either a ‘latitude of acceptance’ or a ‘latitude of rejection’.

What fascinates me about this – and what is particularly relevant in the sphere of change communications – is what it says about the importance of the way information is communicated and by whom.

Rub people up the wrong way – e.g. by being too partisan or aggressive – and the receiver finds the information objectionable, even if it’s fairly close to what they believe themselves. (Mike Klein’s observation in his upcoming 55-Minute Guide about the tendency for organisations to send in someone they trust to deliver messages to sceptical audiences, rather than someone the audience trusts, certainly speaks to this.)

This is the so-called contrast effect, and I suspect we may have seen a classic example of it last night with voting for the BBC’s Sports Personality of the Year.

As a keen and highly competitive sportsman myself, my own personal view is that recognising outstanding sporting achievement requires meeting three critical criteria:

• Winning. Decidedly un-British, I know, but to those who say ‘It’s not the winning, it’s the taking part’, I say ‘Bollocks!’ If you haven’t actually won anything then you don’t even deserve to be on the shortlist.
• Something that displays unbelievable mental and physical fortitude. Sorry, Phil Taylor, but impressive as 15 world darts titles is, chucking a few arrows at a board isn’t even in the same league as the tests that the likes of Mark Cavendish and Jessica Ennis put themselves through.
• Genuine rarity. The achievement has to be put in some sort of comparative context that indicates just how mind-bogglingly brilliant it is.

For these three reasons – plus the fact that she actually has a personality (the clue’s in the title of the award, folks!) – I cast my vote for the utterly fantastic Amy Williams.

Winning? Check. And as winning goes, an Olympic gold medal is about as good as it gets.

Tackling something properly big and hairy? Check. Hurtling head-first down a bobsleigh run on a glorified tea-tray at 90mph, with your nose just an inch or two off the ice certainly qualifies!

Genuine rarity? Double-check. The first British woman to win individual gold at a Winter Olympics in nearly 60 years, and someone who can’t even train on the ice beating folks who were born on the stuff!

And yet…

Amy didn’t even make the top three.

Why?

Judging from the chatter on Twitter, I suspect it might have something to do with the fact that her celebrity champion was Jeremy Clarkson – a man with the intellectual sophistication of a boiled potato, the sporting credibility of a Teletubby, and a well-established track record of pissing people off.

What a load of old pants!

True to form, this week’s branding task on The Apprentice had me curled up in the foetal position for much of it, gnawing at the furniture.

Whilst the appeal of the show for me has always been as a piece of proper car-crash telly – an object lesson in how not to do things – the branding task is just a little too close to home and never fails to leave me feeling nauseous.

I doubt it’s required viewing for Edward de Bono, but someone ought to give him a nudge to check out this week’s show on the BBC iPlayer. He couldn’t hope to find a better case for his Six Thinking Hats methodology than the disastrous performance of the Ignite team.

Whichever way you cut it, parallel thinking could well have avoided the fundamental problems for Ignite and ultimately saved project manager Kimberly’s bacon…

Crap concept? Having everyone’s attention focused exclusively on creativity, in the first instance, might have helped to stimulate more ideas. However ridiculous, the “Pants Man” concept was the only one on the table, effectively making all subsequent efforts an exercise in turd-polishing.

Negativity dragging everyone down and ruining productivity? Kimberly would’ve had the ideal pretext to put Philip and Lorraine back in their boxes (“That’s ‘Black Hat’ thinking right there. Can we save that ‘til later?”), ultimately buying more time to spend with the packaging designer.

Wrong people brought back to the boardroom? Having everyone thinking in parallel would also have thrown into sharp relief the complete absence of creative input from Howard and Noorul. As it was, they could afford to take a back seat and hide behind all the arguments.

Given recent posts on this and other blogs, regarding the case for bringing a broader business management perspective to brand strategy, it’s also interesting to note that Kimberly is a marketing expert, whereas winning team captain, Kate, is a psychologist by background.

Just goes to show, eh? Her team’s efforts were the best I can ever remember seeing for this particular task on The Apprentice, and it was by far the most harmonious performance of the series so far.

Authenticity, transparency, trust (and how to destroy it)

Hot on the heels of the fuss over publishing MPs’ expenses, a post from the BBC’s Nick Robinson earlier this week sets out the UK government’s efforts to resist publication of the minutes from several cabinet meetings in the run-up to the war in Iraq – despite a ruling from the independent Information Commissioner, subsequently upheld by the Information Tribunal.

It would seem, then, that the Freedom of Information Act applies to everyone save its authors. And they wonder why there’s voter apathy and a collapse in the public’s trust in politicians!

Name: Tom Heap. Specialist subject: the bleedin’ obvious

Last night, I finally got around to watching Tom Heap’s exposé of Primark‘s supply chain on the BBC’s Panorama programme. I wish I hadn’t bothered now – that’s an hour of my life I won’t be getting back.

I’d only recorded it because my interest had been piqued by the sudden cancellation of a similar programme (The Devil Wears Primark), scheduled to air a few weeks ago on Channel 4. Must be something really surprising going on, I thought.

Sadly no. It turns out that the shocking findings of this magnificent piece of investigative journalism basically boil down to:

1. Getting huge volumes of “this month’s” dress in stores at a fiver a pop puts massive pressure on Primark‘s Indian suppliers
2. To cope with these cost and time pressures, some suppliers illegally sub-contract work to children and refugees, paid just a few pence a day
3. Primark‘s factory inspection scheme and membership of the Ethical Trading Initiative counted for nothing in uncovering these abuses

Thanks for the scoop, Tom, but I think most of us could’ve guessed that for ourselves.

Can't afford free range? Don't talk #^@*!

One of the few joys of commuting into London is the opportunity to catch up on my favourite podcasts.

This week, I drew more than a few dirty looks from my fellow passengers, as I narrowly avoided snorting latte down my nose whilst listening to another of Marcus Brigstocke‘s inspired rants on the Now Show.

The king of corduroy was on top form as usual, chewing over reaction to Channel 4’s Chicken Run series featuring Jamie Oliver, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Gordon Ramsay, and aiming a few choice words at those who claim not to be able to afford free range…

“It’s not a question of not being able to afford free range. It’s a question of there wasn’t enough money left after you’d bought over 3,000 Lambert & Butler, every flavour of Pringles on the market and 50 value pizzas in the shape of Shrek’s face!”

Some will no doubt view this as elitist, leftie drivel but I, for one, agree with him. And it’s got nothing to do with animal rights (a worthy by-product though that is); I happen to like knowing the provenance of my food and, bottom line, it just tastes better.

What’s more, it’s not as if it takes a whole lot of effort, and it doesn’t have to cost the earth either. Thanks to sites like BigBarn.co.uk, you can go direct to the source and find fantastic, great value food right on your doorstep.

That’s what my wife and I did last weekend – we literally drove right up to the farmer’s door and were able to pick up a beautiful 1.5kg shoulder of lamb for a ridiculously reasonable £6.90.

If you’re a full-on foodie like me, I really urge you to give it a go. What’s not to love? Top quality food, very reasonably priced, and you get to support your local producers in the process.