Kevin the teenager
You might have heard of the recent kerfuffle surrounding Kevin Roberts, the now-former Saatchi and Saatchi Chairman and ‘head coach’.
Kevin, a couple of weeks ago.
He said, “Edward de Bono once told me there is no point in being brilliant at the wrong thing — the fucking debate is all over. This is a diverse world, we are in a world where we need, like we’ve never needed before, integration, collaboration, connectivity, and creativity … this will be reflected in the way the Groupe is.”
I have to say that I love the lack of self-awareness. Edward de Bono once told Kev there’s no point being brilliant at the wrong thing, so he went ahead and showed his brilliance at sexism, messing up interviews and alienating his workforce. Not sure those were the right things.
Anyway, here’s his apology (Kev’s bits in bold):
“Fail Fast, Fix Fast, Learn Fast” is a leadership maxim I advocate.
Along with ‘get yer tits out for the lads’, I assume. Not sure why we should give a toss about the leadership maxims Kev advocates.
When discussing with Business Insider evolving career priorities and new ways of work/life integration, I failed exceptionally fast.
Yep. Those parts of the interview definitely passed most of us by.
My miscommunication on a number of points has caused upset and offense, and for this I am sorry.
I fucking hate non-apologies disguised as apologies. Apparently it was his ‘miscommunication’ that caused ‘upset and offense’, not his sexism, arrogance or pathetic, outdated attitudes towards women. So he made a little error? He meant to support women/diversity etc. and is so crashingly thick that he ended up expressing opinions that were the opposite of the ones he truly held? Not a ringing self-endorsement for the chairman of a massive global corporation. And maybe he’s just sorry for the ‘upset and offense’ he caused. That’s the real hallmark of the non-apology. He’s not sorry for his opinions, he’s sorry that some of us were upset about them. You see, it’s kind of our fault. Especially the ladies, who are probably still dancing around Kevin’s imagination in some weird little 1980s cocktail party where they all want to listen to his bons mots before giving him a most lavish and grateful humping.
I have inadvertently embarrassed Saatchi & Saatchi and Publicis Groupe, two companies I love and have been devoted to for almost 20 years.
I have expressed my regret and apology to the companies for the furor my remarks and language stimulated, and I extend this to colleagues, staff and clients.
Again, he’s sorry for the ‘furor’, not the words or the sentiments they expressed. And originally he only said sorry to the companies (what did he do? Walk up to the headquarters and bellow an apology into the bricks and mortar? Maybe he cried over some headed notepaper), but he’s now graciously extended this to ‘colleagues, staff and clients’. The rest of us can apparently go and whistle, but then the furor was kind of our fault, so why would he apologise to us for something we did?
So that we can all move forward, I am bringing forward my May 1, 2017, retirement from the company, and will leave the Groupe on September 1, 2016.
He’s doing that so ‘we’ (not sure who the ‘we’ refers to) can move forward. Unlike his views, which are stuck in 1957. So he wasn’t fired, he didn’t resign, he just brought his retirement forward by a few months. What a sacrifice. I wonder if he’ll be declining his inevitable financial compensation. Pardon me if I doubt it.
There is a lot of learning to reflect on, and within the thousands of tweets, comments and articles there are many powerful and passionate contributions on the changing nature of the workplace, the work we do, what success really looks like, and what companies must do to provide women and men the optimal frameworks in which to flourish.
I believe that new thinking, frameworks and measures are needed to make more rapid progress on diversity in all its forms, in all professions and occupations. Hopefully, the focus on this serious and complex issue will gather momentum.
He can say that again, with much of the new thinking hopefully occurring between his ears.
So thanks for that, Kev. Despite the revelation that there used to be a bit of a twat at the top of one of advertising’s largest companies, I’m glad the response to this gaffe has led to a greater focus on the diversity issue (including a priceless offer from Cindy Gallop to help Saatchis learn about gender diversity for the same salary Kev was on). Every cloud…
Sad to see you jumping on this one Ben especially after your Trump post.
Why, whatever do you mean?
Becuase you’ve misrepresented what he said and speculated wildly on who he is. Easy to do and boring.
In so doing you’ve contributed to the most awful trend of our times and joined the likes of Cindy Gallop who really should be called out but can’t nor ever will be by anyone who doesn’t have a death wish.
I’ve never met either of them but here’s a snippet of staggering self-entitlement from the latter:
‘Here’s why, while I’m taking interviews, I’m refusing all media requests to write posts about the Saatchi/Kevin Roberts debacle:
White men in our industry are paid millions to do the wrong thing. Nobody’s paying me anything to do the right thing. Holding companies/agencies/brand marketers aren’t inviting me to sit on their boards (they should). Holding companies/agencies/brand marketers aren’t asking for my consultancy services to help reinvent themselves (they should). Holding companies/agencies/brand marketers aren’t booking me to come speak to their leadership and employees (they should). I am battling to build a #sextech startup that is a huge creative idea with huge social benefit that nobody in our industry will help fund. I have more critical things to focus my time, effort, energy and mindspace on. #changetheratio #diversity
UPDATE: The above is not a plea for sympathy. It’s a plea for board invitations, consulting engagements, speaking gigs, and funding. In other words, $$$$$$$$$$$$$.’
In the echo chamber this lady is a inspiration.
I haven’t misrepresented him. I’ve quoted him verbatim.
Not sure how wild the speculation can be after that. He said (and admitted that he’s said) offensive things. I agreed.
His apology is a non-apology. If you want to take issue with that point of view I’d love to know how you see it.
90% of what you wrote was about Cindy Gallop. Seems you have a bit of an axe to grind there. Of course what she wrote isn’t a plea for sympathy. From what I’ve read of hers she doesn’t seem the sympathy-seeking type. So she wants to be paid for bringing diversity training/consultancy into a male-dominated industry. What’s the problem with that? Should she do it for free? In suggesting her motives are purely financial one might say that you’ve misrepresented what she said and speculated wildly on who she is. How ironic.
I’m not sure what your real issue is here, but from your comments you sound like you might be Kevin, or perhaps his mum (apologies for the wild speculation).
Well it was a long quote. If it had been a short quote it would have been less than 90% and I would have looked less like I had an axe to grind, possibly even like a reasonable commenter though unlikely because dissent will not be tolerated. In the words of the great George W. Bush ‘You’re either with us or you’re with the sexists.’
The thing is women probably are, on average, less driven by career goals than men. That’s what he said because his observations bear that out. Are yours different? Mine aren’t. He only needs to be correct in a small number of cases for it to have a discernible impact on diversity goals. And even if he was wrong so what? He never said women are less capable nor that he wouldn’t give an ambitious woman a top job (now that would be sexist) and the progressive hiring policies of S&S bear that out. But that’s not important right now is it? Not when there’s capital to be gained by the professionally offended and their army of useful idiots.
Not sure what you mean by ‘dissent will not be tolerated’. I’ve put the dissent up on my blog. If that’s not tolerance I don’t know what is.
Maybe you’re unhappy that I’ve pointed out the fact that you’ve contradicted yourself. I dunno. You think I misrepresented him, but you haven’t explained how, other than to say he’s not actually a sexist. He said the diversity debate is ‘fucking over’, but it’s not. Explain to me why 88.5% of CDs are men. It’s not because women have different career goals, otherwise the women who work outside the creative department would be represented by a similar percentage. However, across the business as a whole 30.5% of execs are female. Do you think there’s something going on there that isn’t purely ‘career goals’? If not, explain that stat. It may not be pure sexism (nasty blokes thinking women ought to be back in the kitchen), but it might just have something to do with the atmosphere within advertising agencies and the extent to which it appeals to women.
My experience, since you ask, is that there’s still a lot of sexist behaviour in ad agencies, and if I noticed it the women must notice it even more.
What he actually said was ‘the debate is fucking all over’. You’ll have to ask him what it means but I’d say it’s pretty ambiguous. The debate is ubiquitous? Or there’s is nothing more to say on the matter with the conclusion unspecified? Maybe he’s just bored of talking about and is busy getting on with what he should be doing which is hiring the best people for the job regardless of gender and politely accepting the decisions of the women (and men) who politely decline increased responsibility.
The statistics you’ve posted are unenlightening unless you can tell me what percentage of women are in the running for senior positions in the creative department and how they compare with those in the running for other departments. It would seem odd to me that there is something uniquely sexist about the creative department but that’s just a hunch.
On the point about how the creative department lacks appeal to women it seems to me that you agree with Kevin because that is basically what he said. To which all I can say is, ladies, join the club.
All of this is moot Ben. The rights and wrongs of Kevin Robert’s comments pale into insignificance in comparison to the way he has been treated. You are a smart guy. One of the smartest. You should know this. The speed with which we are heading into a world of self-censorship is fucking terrifying. The people driving it are perpetuating a truly terrible trend even if their intentions are good so please don’t join the mob.
I think you’ll find the debate is “fucking over” because no one on either side is capable of holding a serious debate. On the one hand you have this tawdry and patronising “girl power” view, while on the other you have people being marched off the premises for having a more nuanced opinion. Publicis themselves closed down any possible debate by (effectively) firing Roberts. And that isn’t diverse or equal, guys. That’s positively Orwellian – the last place on earth that anyone (male or female) should aspire to work.
I think we all need to be brutally honest here: massive, global advertising companies don’t want women in their boardrooms because they’ve suddenly discovered a conscience. They want them there so they can sell more women more shit like lipstick and washing powder in a slightly less amoral way. Roberts didn’t have to stand down because he was a sexist. He stood down because he didn’t share the view of the holding company.
The fundamental problem this industry has isn’t that there aren’t enough women in it. It’s that there are far too many colossal dickheads.
Oh, and anyone who thinks Cindy Gallop represents anything more than her own interests is frankly a cretin.
As is anyone who thinks massive global corporations give a shit about selling women lipstick and washing powder in an ‘amoral’ way.
Are you saying they’ve ‘suddenly discovered a conscience’ or not?
And ultimately the only thing anyone represents is their own interests. If they happen to coincide with someone else’s then great, but that’s never more than a coincidence.
This is a good article about the subject:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/saatchis-sexism-row-suggests-feminists-cant-handle-debate/
No it isn’t.
Hey what about my comment that Kev is a major bellend because of “lovemarks” and perpetuating the myth that people want to have conversations with their toilet cleaner. Not because he’s a sexist?
Sorry Spiny. For some reason it didn’t appear (I haven’t seen it but I’ve put every comment up).
And yes: the Lovemarks thing is dreadful.
As a senior female creative in an ad agency I don’t feel the debate is fucking over. I have worked in 4 agencies from small to large, and have often been the only female in the department. Moving up the ladder is about work, but it’s also about relationships with your CDs/ECD. The laddish culture of creative departments makes forging these relationships hard. My creative partner is a man and I have experienced CDs address him when they talk to us as a team. I know that I’m not the only female creative in a mixed team to find this. I think people often don’t even realize they are doing it. Of course, there are some fantastic male CDs out there who have treated me and my partner equally, but until you get more female CDs/ECDs , creative departments will continue to be isolating places for a lot of women.
Roberts’ comments are dismissive of the problem and for the sake of women in his agency it was right he left. I agree that some creatives often don’t want the big jobs as they prefer a better work life balance. It is his suggestion that this is a ‘female’ view that is offensive. I know just as many men as women who would rather go home and see their families than stay late every night at work. There are creatives who would rather make ads than lead departments, but again, this is true of both men and women. As a woman I enjoy the competitiveness of a creative department. I would like to be a CD. Please do not think that Roberts is talking for women in the industry.
I think you’re being unfair female creative.
There is no indication that if Kevin Roberts was your boss he wouldn’t promote you. Quite the opposite in fact. And isn’t that all that really matters?
No idea what the guy is really like but Ben’s imagination has probably run away with him. The fact that comments which are at the very least open to interpretation has resulted in such a vivid condemnation seem to me to be a sign of the times.
You have every right to wish for more equality. Many men also wish for more fairness and reason.
‘Isn’t that all that really matters’?
No.
Come on. Give it a bit more thought.
For some reason I don’t have a reply button to continue the chat with ‘anonymous’ above.
But ‘Female Creative’ has added some very interesting points to the debate.
What she says is what I meant by ‘the atmosphere within advertising agencies and the extent to which it appeals to women’. It’s a kind of insidious sexism that you’ll barely notice if you’re a white bloke, but it’s there and it’s problematic. This is borne out by the 88.5% statistic.
In response to Anonymous, the number of female applicants is a symptom of the sexism. Women aren’t inherently stupider or less creative, but for some reason far fewer of them are getting hired in senior positions in creative departments. If they’re not crap at the job they must either be disinclined to work in the industry or discriminated against, and that’s a debate that needs to continue.
And perhaps Anonymous is right that we are too quick to judge and too harsh with our punishments, but perhaps not… I’d say that in this case, like most, money talks and the real reason Kevin was pushed out early was to do with the perception that his comments might damage S&S’s standing amongst clients.
Are we in a world where people can’t say what they think for fear of reprisals? That’s a much harder question to answer because there’s a big grey area where ‘free speech’ meets ‘hate speech’ and the evaluation of the two will always be subjective. Could we say Kevin’s words were fine? Of course. That’s what Anonymous is saying. Could we say they were offensive? Of course. That’s what lots of other people, including me, Female Creative, The Ad Contrarian and Kevin’s boss are saying. These things are not black and white, nor have they ever been. On the other side, people like Donald Trump and Nigel Farage can say far worse things with no material consequences. Is that OK? The answer, of course, is, ‘it depends’.
In my experience, bellends of all genders get paid more than nice people too.
i am married to an Ivy League educated wife. I have four sisters. I have two daughters. My mother was an Irish angel, RIP. One thing all this has taught me is to sometimes I should just shut up and watch my tongue. I should give a seminar on this.
I was working at an agency as an all male team and we were both ‘made redundant’ for a bunch of spurious reasons. The next day a new all female team joined that according to a friend in the HR department were hired y the CDs because they were much cheaper. I’m not sure if this is being progressive or not.
So the reasons they gave you were spurious but the reasons HR gave were financial?
And is this related to their gender? Were they being paid less for doing the same job, as so many women are? And, ironically, did this end up working out better for them as they claimed two jobs they would otherwise have been priced out of?
Questions, questions…
The reason the CD gave was spurious, the reason the HR department (friend in HR) gave was financial. They were hired to do the same job for less money – of course they could have asked for more. The reason I was given and my partner was clearly not related to their gender. I guess the point is, as you say, was this good for them as two women got jobs that may well have been hard to get otherwise, or bad as they were paid below the salary they should have claimed. Either way, sucked for me.
Sorry to hear that. I’ve been there and the suckiness was a right arse.
How do you know if you’re a victim of sexism or just not that good or, equally, not that lucky?
Impossible to know on an individual basis, but if you look at overall stats, either women are generally worse at advertising or there’s a degree of discrimination.
If men also gave birth, there’d be flexible working hours and child care for all.