Private View · 2025-03-24 · 42 min
Key moments - from our scoring
Substance score
61 / 100
Five dimensions, 20 points each
Albert Hill draws on his background as a design journalist and founder of The Modern House (launched 2004) to challenge conventional branding wisdom. He argues that the democratization of good design through tools like Squarespace and design templates has created visual homogeneity across industries, making it difficult for brands to differentiate. His central insight - that a bad website might actually signal a superior product or experience - inverts assumptions about digital polish as a proxy for quality. Hill uses examples from his travels (a cash-only Cologne bar with an outdated Facebook page, a hotel stuffed with mid-century design classics) to illustrate how oversaturated design aesthetics now read as exhausted rather than aspirational. He advocates for a shift away from rigid brand style guides toward instinctive, experimental approaches that echo punk DIY ethos. As a consultant advising founders, Hill emphasizes starting with authentic brand purpose and choosing channels strategically, rather than being enslaved to platform requirements or algorithms. The conversation touches on how younger audiences have become immune to traditional branding tropes, the rise of 'naive design' and intentional imperfection, and the challenge of maintaining creative freshness once a brand becomes established.
According to Hill, if a company prioritizes the real-world experience and product quality over digital presentation, a neglected website can signal that their resources and attention are invested in what matters - the actual offering - rather than marketing optics. This inversion of digital polish-as-proxy-for-quality is especially true for established businesses like the Cologne bar that have thrived since the 1950s without polished digital presence.
Hill argues that because high-quality, accessible design is now everywhere - through templates, design tools, and mass adoption - brands can no longer rely on visual polish alone to differentiate. This has created cultural immunity to conventional 'good design,' making experimental, imperfect, or deliberately spiky creative approaches more effective for standing out.
Naive design refers to intentionally imperfect or non-professional-looking creative work that prioritizes authenticity and instinct over polished execution. It's emerging because audiences have become oversaturated with slick, corporate branding and respond better to work that feels fresh, experimental, and unfiltered - reminiscent of DIY punk aesthetics.
Hill suggests that rigid style guides are becoming counterproductive. Instead, brands should embrace more instinctive, experimental approaches with tolerance for variation, as this signals freshness and creative vitality - especially to younger audiences who view heavy-handed standardization as corporate and stale.
Hill advises starting with authentic brand purpose and values first, then strategically selecting which channels (digital and otherwise) best serve that core idea. This reverses the common approach of being enslaved to platform templates or algorithms, allowing brands to work against algorithmic constraints rather than within them.
Our reviewer’s read on each dimension, with quotes from the episode.
The episode contains some genuinely interesting observations - particularly the tension between 'bad' design signaling care about experience, the fatigue with ubiquitous good design, and the idea that younger generations are immune to traditional branding - but these insights are diffused across considerable filler, repetition, and conversational meandering. Albert develops ideas unevenly, often circling back to anecdotes (the Cologne bar, the hotel, his son) without extracting deeper actionable principles. For a B2B operator, the signal-to-noise ratio is moderate.
when you're talking about design, ah, you're talking about a very particular type of design, you know, and I think that really what it is is rather than junking the idea of design, it's just changing what design means.
a lot of people see the platforms as like an enemy that needs to be sort of like wrestled with, you know, and in a way, I kind of try to encourage people to start with what it is that you want to do and then start to work out which channels will serve that thing
Albert pushes back on some conventional wisdom - particularly the idea that imperfect branding can signal authenticity and that design saturation has made perfection a liability - which is contrarian and somewhat fresh. However, the core thesis (oversaturation leads to fatigue, brands need authenticity and story) is well-worn in design circles. The 'bad design is good' framing is clever but not radical; it's observation rather than breakthrough thinking. The discussion lacks first-principles rigor and relies heavily on anecdote rather than systematic reframing.
I'll go on to like a state agent's website and all that had been totally stripped away and boiled down to three bedrooms in this postcode
but on the other hand, you're like, oh, God, thank goodness it's not that, you know, chummy, uh, pastel colored, you know, brandy everywhere.
Albert Hill is a genuinely relevant guest: founder of The Modern House (established 2004, a genuinely disruptive player in UK estate agency), practicing consultant/coach to founders, and former design journalist. He has demonstrated scale and have lived through the full cycle of disruption, maturation, and category saturation. However, the episode doesn't extract deep operational details or hard lessons from his actual business-building; the conversation remains largely theoretical and reflective rather than tactical. His current work advising other founders is mentioned but barely explored.
co founder of much loved estate agency the Modern House. Set up in 2004, the company marked a sea change for the world of property sales
as a journalist I was used to, uh, writing about houses and the stories of houses, of the people in the houses
The episode is dominated by vague examples and impressionistic observations. Albert references the Metronome Bar in Cologne, a Cologne hotel, a beer shop, Monzo, Squarespace, and his 14-year-old son, but provides almost no numbers, metrics, timelines, or concrete business outcomes. The Modern House itself - presumably a rich case study - is barely dissected. No revenue figures, customer acquisition costs, conversion impacts of design choices, or measurable results from his consulting work are provided. The conversation trades in generalization rather than evidence.
you go on to like a state agent's website and all that had been totally stripped away and boiled down to three bedrooms in this postcode
you know, Monzo not doing anything different, you know, they just made a little tweak to the way they communicated and bam.
The hosts (Nick and Speaker D/Emma Tucker) ask reasonable opening questions and do attempt to probe ideas like the 'bad design = good product' thesis and the platform dependency question. However, follow-ups are often soft and conversational rather than challenging. When Albert makes vague claims - e.g., 'the algorithm will find you if you create something good' - the hosts express agreement ('I like it, very optimistic') rather than pressing for evidence or counterexamples. The dialogue feels collegial and warm but lacks the productive friction that would sharpen thinking. Several interesting threads (the commercial side of creative agencies, specifics of his consulting work) are dropped rather than deepened.
Well, I think that's an interesting take. Well, maybe that's, uh. They've got to get creative and try and work out how to get the clients to accept it
So it's interesting, there's a weird flip that's happened at some point that would have not been the case.
Computed from the transcript - who did the talking, and the words that came up most.
Albert Hill, consultant and co-founder of much-admired estate agency The Modern House, discusses why a more instinctive, experimental kind of branding could be key to beating the algorithm.
Transcribed and scored by The B2B Podcast Index.
Speaker A: Hi, I'm Toby.
Speaker B: And I'm Nick. And you're listening to Private Views, a podcast by Ask Us for Ideas. Each episode we sit down with brand leaders and creatives to discuss some of the bigger trends and topics impacting business and the creative industry.
Speaker A: In this episode, we meet up with Albert Hill, consultant, coach and co founder of much loved estate agency the Modern House. Set up in 2004, the company marked a sea change for the world of property sales and quickly became known for its thoughtful design led approach to selling houses, as well as a more sophisticated take on brand and content.
Speaker C: As a journalist I was used to, uh, writing about houses and the stories of houses, of the people in the houses, and then you go on to like a state agent's website and all that had been totally stripped away and boiled down to three bedrooms.
Speaker B: In this postcode, Albert joined us in our office for a conversation about the changing nature of design and branding. Together with our head of content, Emma Tucker, he discusses how companies can navigate a world where good design is ubiquitous and challenges some fundamental assumptions around what makes a successful brand.
Speaker A: From why a bad website might actually be a good thing to how younger generations are becoming immune to traditional branding. The discussion touches on some of the pressing questions facing companies and creative agencies today.
Speaker D: So we were talking earlier about how before the Modern House, you were a journalist and obviously that's a sensibility that you've carried through your career, I'm assuming.
Speaker C: That's right, yeah.
Speaker D: Are there things from being a journalist that has been quite pivotal in building a brand?
Speaker C: Definitely. Well, it's just a sort of instinct for a story, a narrative, um, just something that catches the imagination, I think is so important.
Speaker D: Ah.
Speaker C: And often, you know what people say, don't let truth get in the way of a good story. You know, um, sometimes, you know, you've got to be quite fast and loose with facts. I always think to just get a good story out there. And uh, I always think people, people go on about authenticity a lot these days, don't they?
Speaker D: Yeah, that's a real favorite buzzword, I'd say.
Speaker C: Yeah. And I always sort of read that as being more about authenticity of spirit than authenticity of fact.
Speaker D: I like it. It's a healthy dose of poetic lessons.
Speaker C: Yes, exactly. Exactly. Yeah. I'm all for poetry.
Speaker A: Yeah.
Speaker D: And that ability to find that narrative is obviously very, really important.
Speaker C: Well, exactly, yeah. I mean, you know, in terms of the founding of the Modern House, a minigo. It was just very simply that, you know, as a journalist, I was used to, uh, writing about Houses and the stories of houses and the stories of the people in the houses. And then you go on to like a state agent's website and all that had been totally stripped away and boiled down to three bedrooms in this postcode. And you're like, well, hang on a minute, this is much richer, uh, than that. So it's just trying to cross breed the two a little bit, really.
Speaker D: I feel like people cottoned onto m it quick as well. People like, oh, okay, I see. This is a different way of doing things.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: Better way. This is a more engaging way.
Speaker C: And it was just, and it was more natural. It's just, uh, purely born out of curiosity, actually. Um, it was in fact, locally, there were a couple of houses that were on the market that I was really interested in and I was just frustrated that the local agents details just told me nothing about, uh, the houses. And I was really curious about some things. Why is that chimney there? You know, who's that there? Why is that there? You know, what's the story? And when you go there and you meet the owner, for instance, and they tell you all these amazing stories about, and you see all these characters and all these details, you think, wow, this is incredible, this house. And the estate agents have essentially tried to make it seem as boring as possible. So doing something about it, it's much
Speaker D: more persuasive that way as well.
Speaker C: Right.
Speaker D: Much more inclined to buy into something where you can imagine maybe the history that came before.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly, exactly, exactly. But it's only pointing to things that are already there. Uh, it's not like embellishing with kind of nonsense words because no one's stupid enough that if you say it's got an amazing thing view when it's looking out at a car park, they're actually going to think it's amazing.
Speaker D: You know, people can't tell the difference.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker D: Um, so, yeah, uh, we're going to talk about design.
Speaker C: Yes.
Speaker D: Which is interesting because the modern house has really pioneered such an interesting use of design and celebration of design. But I know when we spoke before, you had this idea that quite often, um, if you go to a brand and they've got a really terrible website, you know, it's going to be a good product or a good service or a good experience, which feels quite contrary to what you'd expect.
Speaker C: Yeah, I mean that's not a hundred percent hard and fast rule. But an example of that is actually, um, on Friday. On Friday night, I was in Cologne in Germany and someone had told me about this Bar called Metronome Bar. Uh, and so what's the first thing you do? Look online, see if you can find a trip. And like they had one Facebook page that was obviously last updated like five years ago, a holding page which was obviously a stock photo of, you know, a pint of beer on a bar. And you. You know, in the olden days I would have gone, there's no way I'm going anywhere near that place because they clearly haven't got their shit together. But I'm, um, like, oh, this place is going to be good. You know, and of course you got you is absolutely amazing because they care wear more about the experience of their space than they do about the digital footprint.
Speaker D: Yeah. So it's interesting, there's a weird flip that's happened at some point that would have not been the case.
Speaker C: Exactly.
Speaker D: This weird reality where maybe that is becoming the case. The things are diverging, that is.
Speaker C: And now you almost, you're starting to see people almost sort of, you know, do things really badly on purpose, aren't you? You know?
Speaker D: Yes. The rise of the naive design.
Speaker C: That's it.
Speaker D: That's the proper term.
Speaker C: Exactly.
Speaker D: I don't know if that's really the.
Speaker C: No shit posting is another thing I've heard people talk about.
Speaker D: Yeah. Rage baiting.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: So you went to this bar.
Speaker C: So I went to the spring. Yeah. And it was brilliant. But I mean, I was conflicted because it was a bar that had been there since the 50s or something and they rather self consciously sort of didn't take card, only took cash and they played, you know, only vinyl LPs on her, you know, 50s. And part of me thought like, this is so annoying and pretentious. Like, get with the real world. We all use like Spotify and play on our phones these days. But then I thought, actually, you know what? It's a much more visceral, sensual experience, actually, so let's just go with it, you know, let's just enjoy the fact that I'm not getting my phone out to pay and that, uh, you know, you know, so I thought. And the fact that I guess it has been doing that since the 50s, so it's slightly less of a cynical gimmick.
Speaker D: And if on top of that they had a super slick website, the two things would be completely odds with each other.
Speaker C: Well, that's right.
Speaker D: When it feel real and it wouldn't feel.
Speaker C: No, exactly, exactly.
Speaker D: So in a way, maybe it's a smart decision on their part.
Speaker C: I think so. I think so, yeah. Um, I mean, I I guess the commercial part of me also thinks they're probably not making as much money as they could do. But you know, let's forget that for the moment.
Speaker D: I mean, it raises an interesting point about how design makes people feel. But if as humans we've maybe become a bit suspicious about really accomplished neat and tidy design, does it, is it actually starting to have a strange effect on us where we think m the brand and the design is still so excellent the product's going to lack as a result?
Speaker C: Yeah, no, absolutely. I think we're at a really interesting juncture, aren't we? Um, and I'm fascinated to see where it goes because there's so many forces pulling us in different directions in terms of like AI and all that sort of stuff. Um, yeah, sorry, then I'm going there.
Speaker D: Um, do you think that culturally speaking everyone's an desensitized to design because we see so much more really great branding, so much more great design. There's so many more avenues that it can be delivered into our brains?
Speaker C: Well, I think when you're talking about design, ah, you're talking about a very particular type of design, you know, and I think that really what it is is rather than junking the idea of design, it's just changing what design means.
Speaker D: You know, uh, I looking like a true design journalist.
Speaker C: Exactly. And you know, like creativity is obviously the most important, uh, powerful force in design arguably. And it just feels like it needs a bit of a reboot and there needs to be a new creative force emerging. And it's not quite clear where that is, but the idea of just, you know, beautifully lined up graphics and you know. Yeah, beautiful slick website experiences. I mean, and similarly, when I was in Cologne, I stayed at a hotel that had, you know, just, it was just a tick list of design classics, you know, everywhere in all the room. You know, you just, you could probably sit here and list everything, but if furniture that was in that hotel without going to that hotel, and on one hand there were obviously really beautiful bits of furniture really well designed, often from the mid century period when that creativity was just totally buzzing. But uh, now we've become so used to seeing those bits of furniture, uh, that you're slightly thinking not this again, not this again. You know, and it m might not be bits of furniture that make a hotel really interesting, you know, the next time round it might be something completely different, I don't know.
Speaker D: And do you think that same phenomenon m applies to the branding, the websites that we've been talking about where people are A bit like, oh, this. I've seen this a few times before. This feels like something else. It looks like something else. The experience reminds me of another business.
Speaker C: Yes. Oh, very much so, yeah. I mean, you know, there are so many tropes, aren't there, that we've become so immune to? Um, and that signals so many things. And obviously, you know, big corporations have obviously massively picked up on it now. So. In fact, again, sorry, I'm banging on about my trip to Germany, but, you know, I was in, like, a little backwoods town in Germany, and their branding didn't seem to have changed since, like, the late 80s, early 90s. So they hadn't, like, got on board with a slightly corporatified, corporatized, you know, like, trendy branding.
Speaker D: Um, how did that feel?
Speaker C: Well, it felt at once like, come on, guys, get with the program. You know, nobody uses, like, that stuff anymore. Nobody uses that brand anymore. But on the other hand, you're like, oh, God, thank goodness it's not that, you know, chummy, uh, pastel colored, you know, brandy everywhere.
Speaker D: I felt that was the zaniness to that period of time. I'm looking at it through rose tinted glasses, but I feel like there was a level of hint of madness.
Speaker C: There was definitely. Yeah, yeah, exactly. A hint of madness. And there was a certain, like, do what you want nature to it. Um, but I guess the flip side of that was things were all very badly aligned. Tight faces, but.
Speaker D: Yeah, and the logos were all very tiny, I'm sure.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: Maybe actually huge. One of the two.
Speaker C: Yes, one of the two. Exactly.
Speaker D: So thinking about this context, which is really, really hard for Brannis to understand, understand, I think, how to exist in. How do you claim attention as a company through creativity without falling into the same line as everyone else? Really?
Speaker C: Yeah. Well, I think that. I mean, I was also thinking about this, like, again, a few years ago or five years ago, something it would have been so important to have had, like, a house style. Is that so, you know, you have the palette of X number of colors and X number of fonts, and, you know, you stick to that style guide and everyone knows that if you see that font, it's that brown, you know, And I think that it's a lot more exciting now to just be a lot more instinctive and, yeah, kind of rip that up and. Yeah, I suppose. I think there's a lot more tolerance of experimentation now because it's what people are after. I think there's a general thirst in people for something new, something experimental. So I Would definitely encourage that.
Speaker D: A little bit frightening, though, if you're a business and you're thinking that, okay, you don't have the safety of your colors and your fonts and. And, you know, you're potentially letting people go out and, yes, go a bit wild.
Speaker C: Yes, definitely frightening. Yeah. But versus atrophy, you know, versus, you know, a slow death. I just. Yeah.
Speaker D: And I know, Albert, we've spoken before about this weird thing that happens where people try and be so experimental and so different from everything else in the category that you go full circle. So you'd be standing in your beer shop looking at the craft beers, and you'll be thinking, I can't really differentiate between any one of these because they all look exactly the same. In trying not to look like big beer, they all look like small beer. And you can't make a decision.
Speaker C: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, exactly. You know, in terms of a beer shop, which is, you know, a very interesting place from a particular graphic design perspective, um, certainly the last time I did it, I found, again, the most interesting branding was by, um, a bunch of people who were just like beer nerds and not design nerds in the slightest. And they just obviously just really didn't care about what their labels look like. And they just kind of did what they thought was the kind of fun, and they might have done it like a school experiment or something like that. And of course, that really stood out because neither are they trying to be the kind of quirky, wacky, you know, uh, weird craft beer, and neither was it the corporate thing. So that was just kind of interesting, that. And it was just instinctive and wrong. But it worked.
Speaker D: It worked.
Speaker C: Yeah, it was.
Speaker D: Right.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: So it's a bad website. Back to that bad label.
Speaker C: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker D: Do you feel like for a lot of companies, maybe branding has become something that sort of facilitates people through the process rather than something that's enjoyable for them. It's about convenience and people accent down the slide.
Speaker C: Yeah, I mean, I haven't thought about it like that, but yes, yes, exactly. I think, uh, I think you said the word fun then, and I think that's like, that's just so important, you know, especially for a younger, uh, brand, is communicating. It's just tapping into some sort of foundational energy that you have and no one else has got, because as soon as you start to display that, other people will go, hang on a minute, there's a source of energy over there. And we'll. Let's go towards it, you know, and if you're just aping other things and other people, of course, it's not going to have the same potency.
Speaker D: Is there something that we can blame for what has happened? I always think it's the sort of infinite scroll. There's just so much being delivered into our eyeballs.
Speaker C: Well, I also think that, you know, good design is nice. You know, there's no getting around it. And I do think that, you know, during my time as a design journalist, which was sort of, you know, what, late 90s through to. Through the 2000s and sort of, you know, 20, uh, 10 type thing, which was really a massive period of design rising, coming into mass consciousness, as opposed to it being a slightly niche thing. That was actually a very comforting time because it was like, great. Now I can move through a world where there's a lot of really good design. Design, you know, so. So there is. But now we're too comfortable. Do you see what I mean? You fit in.
Speaker D: You're feeling like too much good design.
Speaker C: You've had too much good design. Slightly. So, yeah.
Speaker D: Uh, so you'd like a return to a certain kind of spikiness, maybe.
Speaker C: Yeah, I think that's maybe a good way of putting it. Yeah.
Speaker D: Something that feels a bit uncomfortable.
Speaker C: Yes, exactly. Exactly. So I guess the last time culture had that masterpiece, obviously the kind of punk here and wasn't it, you know, which really kind of like, uh, has sort of tried to rip it out and start again.
Speaker D: Um, and I guess there's that same diy, like, you don't need to follow a framework, you don't have to follow a brand style guide.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: Make it yourself, make it up as you go along. If it's not that great, maybe it doesn't matter.
Speaker C: That's part of the pleasure. That's right. Absolutely. I also think that it's not being a slave to the, um, the platforms that you're on, you know, if you think, yeah, yeah, we're trying not to be, you know, because, you know, for instance, say something like Squarespace, which has got its templates, they're all very nice. You know, they are very nice templates, but they're so accessible to everybody. And, you know, it's very easy to just go, yeah, pick them off the shelf and it'll look nice, you know, But I think that a. You've got to think about, you know, there's tons of different platforms out there, not all digital as well, of course, you know, so you really got to think about a brand from so many different and new angles and think about how to get around the algorithms and how to get around platforms, you know, because, you know, a lot of most interesting recent things have been, I guess, existed in multiple places. Not just as a website or as a social media account, but as like a whole multi dimensional thing.
Speaker D: It's a much bigger job than it ever used to be.
Speaker C: On one hand, yes, it is, but that's this. That is to assume that you're thinking about it strategically and holistically. If you just do it instinctively and don't think about it too much, that's, I think, the way to do it
Speaker D: personally and as someone that's founded a business and you've gone through that process of understanding your branding, building it and adapting over time.
Speaker B: Yeah.
Speaker D: Would you approach things differently now? Would you approach it in the way that you're describing, this kind of slightly untested, experimental way?
Speaker C: Uh, yes. I think that is the only way in this age to stand out is to approach it like that. Uh, yeah.
Speaker D: Okay, interesting.
Speaker C: Um, if you really want to, if you really want to stand out. Yeah. I think you've got to have the courage of your fictions. Yeah. And you know, when we started it back, you know, when we started Modern house Bank in 2004, we were obviously following our instincts, but uh, uh, our instincts for what was right was different to what it would be because the culture, you know, life was very different to what it is now. So when what we did was, uh, you know, we tried to slightly sort of uniformize things, streamline things, make everything look good and nice and legible and understandable in a world that was slightly all over the place. And I think that like, I mean, when I say world was slightly over the place, I mean an industry that was slightly overplace. And I think that, um, yeah, now it just requires a different set of thinking really.
Speaker D: Do you think if you were going to found that same business today.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: It would be a radically different approach because I feel like based on what you've said, there'll be some key things that would still be really important. This idea of the story and the history and.
Speaker B: Yes.
Speaker D: Poetic license, maybe.
Speaker C: That's right. Yeah.
Speaker D: That perhaps your approach to brand would be somewhere else entirely.
Speaker C: Yes, I think it would. And what would be the same is, as you said, is like having fun, you know, and feeling fresh. You know, that's uh, that's really what it's about.
Speaker D: I think it's hard if you're a brand and you're doing something that's really revitalizing a whole sector or changing A whole sector. You're the forerunner.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: The modern house was the forerunner.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: For property, estate agents. But then once you've done it, you get all these people on your tail kind of doing the same thing, and then you're right back almost at the beginning of the circle and it feels like we're locked in this.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker D: Like a snake biting its own tail.
Speaker C: Yeah, that's right. That's right. And then of course, you get a certain reputation you have to uphold. Exactly. That you have to uphold because. Yeah. And you don't want to have that sort of like midlife crisis where you're a band that suddenly, you know, starts launch reggae album or whatever it is. You know, so you've got to respect like the. Where you come from and what you've done and all that sort of stuff. Um, you know, so that's a whole new challenge. But that's not. That's the challenge of a, of a business of, uh, the age of the modern houses. And it's not a challenge of a business that's new. You know, it's a business news. Got a bit more license.
Speaker D: Yeah. And I know that you're working with other founders now. You're advising them. That's part of your day to day.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: What kind of creative problems are they facing or what the things that are worrying them about how they sharpen the world through design and through creativity or through advertising, through marketing.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: All these many, many channels that there are.
Speaker C: Yeah, well, exactly. I mean, I think that, you know, a lot of people see the platforms as like an enemy that needs to be sort of like wrestled with, you know, and in a way, I kind of try to encourage people to start with what it is that you want to do and then start to work out which channels will serve that thing that you want to do. If you see what I mean, it's
Speaker D: back to front almost.
Speaker C: It's the other way around.
Speaker D: Don't think about. Don't have those first, uh, think about what your thing is.
Speaker C: Exactly. And, um, people, people like worship these channels. Like they're, you know, like they can make or break you. You know, it's like their job to find you, you know, in a way, if you're good, you know.
Speaker A: Yeah.
Speaker D: I mean, we're all at the mercy
Speaker C: of the algorithm, but I hear that so much. We're all at mercy the album. But the algorithm is set out, uh, to find good things. And in a way, if you create something good, the algorithm will find you.
Speaker D: I think it's because it feels like such a black box. No one seems to, really.
Speaker C: Who cares about them? You know, it's like, yeah, you raise a good.
Speaker D: You raise a good point. I mean, if you're trying to sell a lot of things and get people attention, I guess there's an element of
Speaker C: playing the game well, they're smart, right?
Speaker D: M hm.
Speaker C: The people who run these companies, smart. And if you created something that's really good and people want a bit of it, they will come find you and they will work out, you know? Do you know what I mean?
Speaker D: I think so. It's a very optimistic take. I like it.
Speaker C: It's a very optimistic take. Yeah. And, um. Well, I think it's really important to not see the algorithms and, you know, like, big tech and big tech bros. And all this kind of stuff is just these kind of evil manipulators because essentially they're feeding off the creators. And the creators have got to remember that they're the, you know, they're the people out of supremacy.
Speaker D: They're the people making the stuff that feeds these platforms.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly. Yeah. And I shouldn't forget that.
Speaker D: I wanted to go back to this idea of, um, we called it naive design earlier. Crap design, I think you called it, um, something that's a bit awkward, purposely so. It's almost like a bit of an outsider in this world of really slick branding. Can anyone do that? Does anyone have license to do that?
Speaker C: Uh, you need a certain cockiness to do it, I think you see. Certain confidence to not be perfect, because that's really what it's about. Uh, the stuff that I really enjoy is, is people who talk, like the kind of Instagram accounts and stuff like that that I really enjoy tend to be people who care more about, um, communicating their enthusiasm for something than about saying exactly the right thing.
Speaker D: Do you see what I mean?
Speaker C: And often they'll get it wrong or it doesn't quite hit the mark, um, but just in their sheer excitement and say whatever it is they want to say or share whatever it is they want to share, or experiment. Whatever it is they want to experiment, you know, again, you just capture that thrill.
Speaker D: So maybe it's care less what the audience thinks to an extent, that's right.
Speaker C: And also care less about whether it conforms to normal ideas of beauty or order or how, you know, people accept a, uh, post or an event or whatever it is should look.
Speaker D: Embracing chaos.
Speaker C: Embrace. Absolutely. Embrace chaos. Embrace the. Yeah, the ragged edges, you know.
Speaker D: And where, in your opinion, do designer studios and creative agencies come into all this? Because they're very important part of things.
Speaker C: Yeah, well, um, they are creatives. Right. And creatives are. Are, uh, massively important, especially when it comes to brands. Uh, M. I just think that they, you know, need to be aware that culturally, I think that there's a. They need to push the envelope a little bit more, I think, really. And actually, um, they will have a positive. You know, the world will thank them for it.
Speaker D: You know, I feel like some of those people will say, we're desperate to do that. Ah, but our clients won't let us.
Speaker C: Well, I think that's an interesting take. Well, maybe that's, uh. They've got to get creative and try and work out how to get the clients to accept it in there. I don't know. I don't know. You know, I mean. Well, I mean, to get back to some of the consultancy stuff that I do, I often consult with, um, creative businesses.
Speaker D: Right.
Speaker C: And creative businesses are very good at being creative. And when it comes to the commercial side of things, they kind of throw their hands up and go, oh, we're creative. So, you know, like, we're not very good at the commercial side of things. But actually, commerciality can be a creative pursuit as well. So in your scenario of we've got all this good work, uh, but the clients are saying, no, well, use your creativity to work out how to get the clients do, you know, like, employ your brain in not just producing the work, but in running your business, I
Speaker D: suppose in persuading them.
Speaker C: M. Yeah, persuading them, exactly.
Speaker D: Winning them over.
Speaker C: Winning them over, yeah.
Speaker D: Also getting them to be a bit more mad, maybe.
Speaker C: Yeah, well, that's right, exactly. Yeah. And again, use a good story as to why it's essential for them to do so.
Speaker D: You know, I mean, I'm fully on board. I feel like that's another buzzword that's really taken over, um, the ad industry and the creative industry, this idea of storytelling stories. But I do also feel like, fundamentally that's a really.
Speaker C: It's just human, isn't it?
Speaker D: Yeah, it's kind of elemental.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly. It's, you know, humans exist by telling stories to each other. That's who we are.
Speaker D: And I wonder if the reason. I mean, Modern random is very complicated, but the reason. Sometimes I just think they're so. So many places a business needs to be and a brand is like this vast kind of cape that you have to throw over.
Speaker C: Uh, yes.
Speaker D: Sounds very sinister now.
Speaker C: Yes. Yeah.
Speaker D: You have to throw it over your social media. Arguably, you got to throw it over your Website. It's got to be in your shops. If you have shops. It's got to be, you know, maybe in your office for your employees. There's so many, many places, I think digitally speaking, it's just. You could be almost everywhere. Right. You could be on Tik Tok.
Speaker C: You could be on, uh, Instagram, you could be on. Okay.
Speaker D: Uh, wherever else. It's about where you draw the line, about how much is feasible and how much you can do.
Speaker C: Well, yeah. And I guess what you're saying that in the olden days, you just had some shops and a corporate. No one ever went to.
Speaker D: Yeah. I'm going to do my TV ad this year for Christmas.
Speaker C: Yes.
Speaker A: Okay.
Speaker D: This year you put your big, lavish TV ad out, and then you think, well, that's my job done. Um, yeah, now it's complete. It's. It's like mania, really.
Speaker C: Yeah, true. Yeah. It's 24 7, isn't it? Yeah.
Speaker D: And there's. I think. I don't know if you'd agree, there's this ephemeral nature to everything where, I mean, there was in the past because, you know, the TVM would be on and it would go, ah. And that would be it.
Speaker C: Right. Yeah.
Speaker D: But now it's like that on stereo, because, I don't know, you might be posting something on Instagram every day, and you've put a lot of time and care into it, and it's just sliding back into.
Speaker C: Yes, yes.
Speaker D: And previous versions of your website are sliding back and disappearing.
Speaker C: Yeah, true.
Speaker D: Do you know what I mean? There's kind of. And as someone that's been a journalist, something that a lot of writers are aware of, their work is being archived or being taken off the Internet. And that could be an entire career just kind of like, gone in a puff of air almost.
Speaker C: Yeah, that's right. You know, I do think it's really important to. Yeah. Archive your stuff as well. Keeping hold of all the stuff that you produce, uh, is also really important. And revisiting it as well, you know, uh, like, as you say, everyone's become a, uh, kind of able to chop up content into all sorts of different parts. And that's one of, obviously, the key skills in today's kind of landscapes. Not only creating content about how to repackage and disperse it. And, um. And sometimes I think, you know, there's sort of enough content in the world. You know, I'd almost sometimes like to just like. Much like, um, you know, there's enough stuff in the world to just, like, stop content. Like Tomorrow. And um, you know, much like, um, you know, people use, you know, wear vintage clothes or make things out of old, you know, just make stuff out of old content that's already there because there's tons of it, you know.
Speaker D: Vintage content.
Speaker C: Yeah, vintage content. There you go. Like kind of archaeological digs.
Speaker D: Archaeological branding.
Speaker C: Yeah, archaeological branding. Brilliant. Yeah.
Speaker D: Do you think that your relationship with design. I'm interested in this because you were a pivotal part of house company that's very led by design, that really celebrated design in all its forms. In terms of your branding, in terms of architecture, how has your relationship with design changed since those early days of the modern house from being someone that was writing about design to the position that you're in now?
Speaker C: Well, I think that, I think, you know, I'm also, you know, I'm an old man now. Um, so, you know, you have, you have a certain realization that was more to life than design, which is quite a realization. M. And, but you also can still see things that uh, are just absolutely mind blowing when it comes to design. You know, certain, uh. I don't know what it might be. It might be a book design, it might be a bit of furniture or whatever it is.
Speaker D: It's still a level of surprise.
Speaker C: Yeah, absolutely. And, and deep sort of connection and humanity and all those wonderful things that design. Because I often think about design really in terms of humanity. You know, it's really just like a way to communicate, uh, kind of love and care and you know, like if you. I always think if you've got a house that's been. Hasn't really been designed, it's just someone's just like knocked it up versus the house that's been like really carefully and beautifully designed. Well, the difference is that you go into one and you just feel like humanity, you know, and the other one is devoid of that.
Speaker D: Which one's? Which, Albert? Which one's? Which is the one that someone's just.
Speaker C: Well, well, the well designed one. Yeah. Is the one that you feel, uh, has ah, got a bit more humanity. But. Yeah, again, but then what is well designed is changing all the time. You know, like I could go into a beautiful 50s Alvar Alte house or whatever and it could be fantastic. Which is not to say that a house that's designed exactly like that today is the right thing to do. Of course it's not.
Speaker D: It's a little shack in the woods, you know, a few logs of wood that would equally great. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker C: Definitely.
Speaker D: A bit like your bath and its website.
Speaker C: Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker D: So these two polls are so interesting, this idea of what's good and what's not good. I guess there's a level of taste, how you feel about these things.
Speaker C: Yeah. Taste is a. Is a very complex word as well, isn't it? You know.
Speaker D: Yeah, I would say so.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: And that obviously applies to the branding conversation as well.
Speaker C: Yeah, it does, it does. And I think that really, you've just got to keep pushing at the parameters, really. And I just think, as I say, like, because it's such a volatile time and world right now. Although I feel like we've been saying that for, like, the last 20 years. Yeah.
Speaker D: But it's never going to be not volatile.
Speaker C: No, exactly.
Speaker D: Kantia.
Speaker C: Time was not volatile.
Speaker D: Um, yeah, but I guess for many reasons it is. It is also very volatile for companies. You know, economies are all over the place and.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: You know, there was a time when companies getting a lot of investment quite easily. Now it's very hard for that to happen.
Speaker C: Yes.
Speaker D: And that in itself is, I think, changing companies relationship with design, with branding, with creativity, how they assign value to that, maybe, or the value they receive that to have.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: If that's kind of where that's falling in the list of things that are most important, maybe when there's a lot of money going around, it was higher up because it was easier to justify. I'm not sure.
Speaker C: Yeah. I mean, there's got to be money going somewhere. Right. Do you think people are just. I don't know, really.
Speaker D: Yeah, it's difficult.
Speaker C: There's definitely a lot less optimism, um, that you can create something new and it will take off, you know.
Speaker A: Yeah.
Speaker D: But I also wonder how new that is in itself. You know, if we were to go back hundreds of years.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: Do people still feel like that if we're in ancient Greece, they'd be like, well, I won't bother doing this beautiful sculpture because, you know, the other guy has already done this beautiful bronze sculpture and actually there's no point in doing another one.
Speaker C: Definitely. Yes.
Speaker D: Little did they know.
Speaker C: Yes. Yeah, well, that's right.
Speaker D: Years later, we'd be saying exactly the same thing.
Speaker C: Well, yeah, no, without a doubt.
Speaker D: I always think as well, there's, um. You know, there's the whole thing about. There's only. What is it? There's only 50 stories or there's only a set number of stories. You know, I'm sure you've come across this. All narratives fall into a framework.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: And I feel like that's probably true across a lot of things. Maybe it's okay if what you're doing isn't setting the world on fire. It's not completely novel, actually. It's enough to do something that is surprising in a way, but definitely so radical.
Speaker C: Definitely. I totally agree with that. I do agree. Yeah. I don't know, you call it 50 stories or whatever it is, but there are definitely, um, universal, archetypal things. And the interesting stuff is often the stuff on the fringes, you know, or it's often just a little twist in the way something's delivered or, you know, like, you know, this is going back a bit, but obviously, like, my son, who's 14, was asking me in the car yesterday, is Monzo like a bank? Like, uh, every. Because he's just starting to get his head around that, you know, like every other bank. And I'm like, yes, it's just a bank like every other bank. It's just got different. It's just not brand. It's just a branding thing.
Speaker D: What did he say?
Speaker C: He like, okay, yeah, that's interesting. And, yeah, so Monzo not doing anything different, you know, they just made a little tweak to the way they communicated and bam. And bam.
Speaker D: The power.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly. Exactly.
Speaker D: What's his relationship with that whole world of brands and design? It's probably not really funny form.
Speaker C: Very much so.
Speaker B: Yeah.
Speaker C: No, it really is. Well, what I find interesting is that, um, he's not so much of a sucker for his. For big brands as maybe I was at that age. You know, it's a little bit more cynical, you know, a little bit smarter. And again, yeah. Won't swallow pills as easily, I suppose.
Speaker D: Really.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: So not as susceptible.
Speaker C: Not as susceptible.
Speaker D: And maybe that's something for companies to think about, which is that, you know, succeeding generations might not be as easy to.
Speaker C: Well, yeah, exactly. I mean, I think I read something the other day about, you know, one of the, you know, like, the whole idea of Nike and the. Be like Mike back in the day, you know, Michael Jordan and, you know, Cristiano Ronaldo wears these and all this kind of stuff. And I think, you know, my son's a bit like, I don't care, uh, you know, in the way that I would have totally cared. And I think that hero worship thing is a little bit over, is a little bit passe. Yeah. And I wonder what it is he is actually looking for. I don't know what it is he's looking for, actually. Uh, but I know that it's not for a big heroic brand to sweep him up.
Speaker D: And, you know, so the big flashy gestures are maybe not where the power is.
Speaker C: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker D: Changing so that it's moving to smaller pockets or niches.
Speaker C: Yeah, that's right. And yeah, I guess, alarmingly, um, he's looking for something that probably will only last like six months and then he can move on to something different.
Speaker D: Do you feel optimistic about. I mean, I feel like you feel optimistic about what design can still do for us.
Speaker C: Oh, massively. I think it's massively exciting because I really do. I do. I'm just absolutely sick of, um, all these brands out there looking the same and it's just gotta change and it will change and, ah, you can start to see sheets of it like appearing in different places. But I do think that I would love for us to have this conversation and like go out into the world right now and take a photo of everything and then come back in 10 years time. Time and compare it. And I do think that it'll be. It'll be quite a lot different or
Speaker D: it might have gone full circle. We'll go through the weird bit. Five years.
Speaker C: Yeah.
Speaker D: Maybe another five years we'll be back to kind of minimal. It might be.
Speaker C: Yeah, yeah. But it'll be done with sort of tongue in cheek, you know what I mean?
Speaker D: Yeah. Postmodern.
Speaker C: Yeah, yeah. Post postmodern. Post diary post.
Speaker D: It's interesting, right, how it's all changing. It's all changing or not changing maybe.
Speaker C: Yeah, well, that's. I mean, I think that's what you've got to embrace. Like, not really knowing what's happening.
Speaker D: Yeah, the chaos.
Speaker C: Embrace the chaos. Stick your neck out, see what happens.
Speaker D: Okay,
Speaker A: that was consultant and the Modern House co founder Albert Hill. And Ask Us for Ideas Head of Content, Emma Tucker.
Speaker B: As always, thanks for listening. And thanks to James Green for editing the episode and George Grinling for the theme music. There's plenty more episodes of Private views available on SoundCloud, Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And to find out more about what Ask Us for Ideas does, head to aufi.com or skusfordeas on Instagram. To stay up to date with all our new episodes, hit the subscribe button. Until next time,
30 - Ragged Edge: brand is an emotional thing59 / 100
29 - Ueno: making technology more human63 / 100
28 - U.N.N.A.M.E.D.: strategy is a map, not a shortcut64 / 100
27 - CōLab: creativity, sideways80 / 100
26 - Culture Defined: grow slow, grow better70 / 100