I witnessed a fascinating piece of post rationalisation by 2 of my colleagues recently. More than half way through a tense and important creative development process the sum total of our efforts was close to zero. This launched an already nervous client into wave upon wave of panic until one colleague drew him the chart you see here.
He argued that much though we might like it to be so, creative development is not a linear process. Instead, getting to a big idea involves rumbling along the bottom trying lots of different things until gold is finally struck. In doing so Dennis argued that by having nothing of any note to show at the intermediate review was therefore a good thing and that we were completely on target for greatness (the asterisk in the above chart).
Conversely, if we had a few half baked ideas we would almost certainly end up with work that was quite possibly good, but not good enough.
I’ve found myself using this argument a lot ever since.
