Conversation with Marcus Collins — The Power Behind What We Buy, What We Do, and Who We Want to Be

Support for PropG comes from another podcast. It's called The Science of Scaling, hosted by Microbearers, a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School. Each week, Mark interviews some of the most successful sales leaders in tech. People including Kyle Parrish from Figma or Kevin Egan at Atlassian. They talk tactically about how to grow business. Because as Robearers will tell you, whether a company is valued at $1,000,000 or $100,000,000, the failure rate is the same. The science of scaling wants to change that. Search for the science of scaling wherever you get your podcasts. That's The Science of Scaling. Support for PropG comes from Vanta. If you're building a business you need standards, specifically security standards. Sock to ISO 27001, hit the compliance, all that stuff could take hundreds of hours of work. That's why you should try Vanta. Vanta automates up to 90% of compliance work and saves you up to 85% of costs so you can reinvest your time and money back into your business. Ready to get started? Listeners of PropG can get $1,000 off Vanta when they go to Vanta.com slash PropG. That's V-A-N-T-A dot com slash PropG. Episode 265 is the country code belonging to Malawi. In 1965, the Medicare program was established and the F word was used on television for the first time. Don't judge a person for drinking and swearing. Judge the quiet sober ones. Those f***er up to something. Welcome to the 265th episode of The PropG Pod. We're still on vacation that'll be ending soon. I know you missed me. You missed me. I'm coming home. I'm coming home. I've taken off. I'm trying to come up with a roaming dog metaphor. Several dogs in the area are pregnant. They tried to capture me. True story. When I was about 15, my closest friend, Adam Markman, he had a German short-haired pointer. We couldn't have dogs. It was just me and my mom. We didn't have the capacity for a dog. But anyways, Adam had dogs. At first, he had a German short-haired pointer. Sweet dog, way too hyper, difficult dog to have in the city. Then he had a series of mastiffs and one of his mastiffs, Bruno. By the way, mastiffs are wonderful dogs. Got lost or just took off. We literally drove around for a couple hours and went down. Even we went down to Culver City, even. We kept asking people if they'd seen Bruno, a large mastiff. We started to zero. This is before GPS is before ending. This dog would stand out. We found some people literally in West LA down by I think Pico and Culver that had seen Bruno and just talking to people on the street. We zeroed in on Bruno and oh my god, you have never seen a 220 pound dog jump into a car so fast to get back to its cushy life in Westwood. Anyways, that has almost nothing to do with what we're talking about here. For our final conversation in August, we're sharing our interview with Marcus Collins, the head of strategy at Weedon, Kennedy, New York. Weedon won. I never know. I never know. By the way, I have recently met no joke that's the former CEO of Weedon Kennedy and the current CEO and they're both super impressive people as is Marcus. That firm continues to hire or attract pretty interesting talent. Marcus is also a clinical assistant professor marketing at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. Professor Collins is one of the highest rated professors at my higher ed startup section and an inductee into the American advertising federations advertising hall of fame. It's kind of a weak flex professor Collins. Anyways, we discussed with Marcus insights from his new book for the culture, the power behind what we buy, what we do, and who we want to be. Marcus, where does this podcast find you? I'm in Austin, Texas at the moment, though I live in Arbor, Michigan. Let's bust right into it. In your new book for the culture, you explore how culture influences behavior. Let's start there. How do you define culture and what is the role it plays in our lives as consumers? Yeah, culture is one of those words that we often use but seldomly have a really good understanding of. And I think about culture through a Dirk Heimian lens, Mille Dirk Heim, one of the founding fathers of sociology who talks about culture as this system of conventions and expectations that demarcate who we are and what are expected of people like us. Since we self-identified by these communities, these cultural giveings, we end up adhering to the expectations of what people like us do. So the beliefs that we hold, the artifacts that we've done, the behaviors that are normative, the language that we use, we adopt these things, not because of what they are, but because of who we are. Which in turn has an impact on our consumption, the social affiliations that we're part of, how we vote, how we recycle, how we worship. If we worship, we're very, very dead. If we bury the dead, who we marry, where we go to school and despite everything associated with social life. Yeah, it's always struck me when I think about culture, I don't know if you think of it this way, but I think, okay, chances are if you're born in a certain age or a certain period in a certain place, I would say if I was a male born in 1920, I would have been a Nazi. I mean, we'd all like to think that we'd have the wisdom to go, this is wrong. I'm not, you know, there's obviously a lot of controversy and a lot of conversation around our founding fathers being slave owners. But I don't think people really appreciate how much you are a product of your context and your culture. So let's start there. I'm going to assume you agree with that, but B, what are the drivers of culture and what have been the most significant changes in American culture and what have been the drivers of that? So we think about culture as a system of systems. It starts with our identity. How do we self-identify? Right? If I identify as a Christian, I hold a set of ideologies and beliefs, truths that I hold about the world, right? I believe Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and therefore the stories I tell myself about the world is through that lens. And because I identify as such and I hold those beliefs, I therefore dress a certain way, symbols mean certain things, right? If you're a Catholic, maybe you use a rosary, the crucifix mean something, I behave a certain way, there are behaviors that are normative for people like me, and then there's language that I use, right? So because of who I am, I see the world a certain way, I share a way of life with people like myself, and then I express who I am through cultural product, right? The literature that I read, the music that I listen to, the movies that I watch, and the brands and brand and products that I consume. So our cultural practice is governed by these mechanisms. Now, what changes have happened in American culture, to your point, they're always changing, is adjunous shocks to the system, take place, and then we discuss it. Is this okay? Do people like us do something like this? And it's through this discourse that we decide what's acceptable behavior for us? And considering there's so many shocks to the system, especially as technology continues to evolve, we learn more, we see more at a faster rate, and therefore we see a faster change in at least fast culture, that the things that are manifested, while our encouraged beliefs sort of change slowly over time. Talk a little bit about what do you think have been the biggest impacts of social media on our culture? Well, in some cases, this has been good, and of course, with all things, there's some bad there. I think about technology, particularly social networking platforms, sort of like Marshall McClood would say, the technology really extends human behavior, like feeder extensions of the wheels or extensions of the foot, glasses, extensions of the eyes, clothes, extension of the skin. And I would say in that case, social networking platforms are extensions of our real-life social networks. On the other end, though, of course, it exacerbates a lot of things that are terrible about social experiences, spreading misinformation, creating these clusters of people who share hate. And just as one thing could be positive, the other thing creates these negative situations. And we have to navigate that as a society when it comes to technology available to us. In your book, you introduced concepts from social psychology, specifically tribes. Can you walk us through this concept and what its implications are for culture? Sure. We are as human species. We are social by nature. As Aristotle said, we are social animals by nature. So everything about us is meant to connect. Evolutionary anthropologists would argue that that's how we're able to evolve. There's our ability to socialize. So since we are bound by connection, we're trying to find people who are like ourselves. At the explosion of the industrial revolution, people left their tribes, their communities, their villages, and went to the major cities to find work. And when they came to these major metropolis, they bumped into people who operated by different cultural characteristics, different meaning frames. And they were introduced to new ideas, new perspectives, new ways of life, may begin to adopt them. And as such, we started to create new identities and find new people, new tribes, new communities. So by a large, we're given to be in these network communities. And technology, as we mentioned earlier, have become ways by which we facilitate that. And within these communities, the cultural characteristics govern what people like us all to do. And to remain good standing members in these communities, we adhere to them. And we abide by these conventions and expectations in an effort to promote social solidarity among ourselves. And the brands, politicians, activists, clergy, managers, and leaders would better understand that, or best understand that, are able to leverage these mechanisms to get people to adopt behavior. How do you, where do you think the intersection between culture and kind of shareholder value is happening or not happening? Sure. I think that there is no external force to human behavior more powerful than culture, full stop. So from an economic perspective, culture becomes a cheat code. It becomes a massive weapon in our ability to compete in the marketplace. And I think about early, early years, for centuries, the global GDP was practically zero. It's like nothing. Because people weren't engaging in exchange in commerce. And if it was, it was utilitarian, focused, and it was very, very minimal. Of course, until 16th century, Queen Elizabeth says, I want to use consumption as a means of e-grandizement, where royalty will have a lot. The people closest to them, nobility will have a little bit more. And peasants will have nothing. And the idea there is that peasants will look up at nobility and royalty and say, I want to be that. And consumption began to expand in the 18th century. The industrial revolution happens as well. Company starts making a little bit more money, paying their employees more money. And they went and spent more money. So companies made more money. Yet this cycle of consumption happening, not because of what things were, but because who people are what they wanted to be. That is, consumption was primarily driven by these social and psychological impulses to help signal where I am on the social hierarchy. The same thing is today that we use brands, the most powerful brands, not because of their utilitarian value, as much as their social value. What do they say about me? How they signal to the road who I am. And those powerful brands are used as identity marks as receipts of identity. And the companies who have fiduciary responsibilities to share holders, when they start to build these vessels of meaning that we call brand that encapsulate the cultural characteristics of a given group of people that abide by a cultural convention or cultural system, they create great opportunities for brands to grow in massive ways. So I'll put forward a couple of thesis and I'm just curious to get your thoughts, pushback, validation. When I think about our culture, American culture over the last 20 or 30 years, I think technology has had the biggest influence that we are where we pay attention. We're paying attention to our phones now. More than we're, you know, more time than we're doing anything else during our waking hours, especially young people. And the thing that strikes me is that it just becomes so polarized the wrong word. On the far left, arguably a refusal to face adult realities, too much virtue signaling, too much pride in presenting yourself as a victim, a lot of identity politics. And then on the right, it just does culture of cruelty, this culture of finding a vulnerable group and weaponizing them. And it seems like things have gotten, our discourse has become so coarse. And it feels as if literally the fabric of America is being torn apart at the hands of social that our culture has become a series of micro-cultures. And the only thing we share is that we hate each other. People are more distressing of people in the other political party than they are of China or Russian troops pouring over the border. One, do you agree with that? And two, do you see it getting worse, getting better? I think there's great polarization for sure. I mean, if you think about like the left side and the right side, the right side to your point, a culture cruelty, what it is, they're actually built a culture of inclusivity, an exclusivity kind of brawling from Edward Burnay's propaganda theory that you can unite people by declaring an enemy of the state. And doing so, they have been able to encapsulate power and encapsulate, you know, people who abide by the cultural characteristics of what it means to be right, right wing. And as a result, we feel more like in groups and out groups. And what happens is as the right gets further more to the right, and people say that's too far for me, they want to maintain their identity and find a new encapsulation within the right. I mean, a moderate Republican or I'm a conservative Democrat. And we find these new sort of labels to affix ourselves so that we're not mislabeled or mischaracterized. But I do agree that while the polarization is happening, I think the technology in the way it's going might be able to facilitate more community. Think about things like Web 3, Discord, for instance, they're about decentralizing the network to find people who are more like yourselves. And while that makes seem like, oh, that's exclusive, that's sort of kind of how we were meant to be. We're meant to be in these collectives of people like us. And while we might find our people in a very, you know, homophilic way, I think we also should be thinking about how do we exist in a broader context. We'll be right back. Support for this show comes from American Express Business. Running a business is no easy feat. American Express Business Cards are here to help. Whether you're a small business owner ready to expand into new markets, or your business is just taking off. American Express Business Cards are built for businesses like yours. Let's talk about investing in your business. American Express understands that every penny earned is another penny that can go towards taking your business further. With a host of select benefits and features available, like a flexible spending limit, they're more than just a business card. They're a partner who works with you to help your business thrive. And if there's ever an emergency, their 24-7 support is ready to help no matter the time of day. American Express Business Cards are built for your business. With features and benefits, like the ability to earn membership awards points on select cards, the power to pay for big business purchases, and more. Built for your business, MX Business. Terms apply, learn more at americanexpress.com slash business cards. Hey, it's Casey Newton, founder and editor of a platformer, a publication about tech, social media, and democracy. And I wanted to let you know that applications are still open for this year's code conference. It's hosted by me and my friends me like Patel from the Verge and Julia Borsten from CNBC. We're going to be taking the stage with ex slash Twitter, CEO Linda Jacarino, GM CEO Mary Barra, Microsoft, CTO Kevin Scott, and many more of the biggest names in tech and business. It's all happening soon, September 26th and 27th, and spots are filling up fast. So apply now at voxmedia.com slash code. That's voxmedia.com slash code. We'll see you there. We'll talk a little bit about your industry. You're the head of strategy for Weed and Kennedy. And I can't get over or it's shocking to me. I was in your world. My first company I started when I was 26 called profit brand strategy, focusing on brand. And I used to work a lot with ad agencies, including yours. And I would go into boardrooms and they would have Lee Cloud, or they would have Nigel Bogo from BBH. Like the ad men, Don Draper's, they were the masters of the universe. I haven't seen an ad guy or an ad gal in a boardroom in 20 years. It just feels as if the industry is just shrinking its way to oblivion. No one really cares what the ad people have to say. One, do you agree with that? And two, what's happened? Is it just that the oxygen has been sucked out of the room by Google and Meta? But it's hard for me to identify a part of our economy that has lost so much relevance in terms of its impact on culture and on or just generally in the business world. Google and Meta lose the value of the entire ad industry in a trading day. What happened? I think it goes back to your point about the biggest disruption in culture, being technology, that when advertising is defined as marketing communications, art and copy to get people's attention in a world where there is tons of things grabbing at our attention and attention-based economy, that becomes a commodity. If your job is to create art and copy, then you've got things like AI today that can create art and copy just as good as the mediocre average agencies. So it starts to pull all the value out of that offering as an industry. I think that what it means for us as an industry is moving beyond the art and copy and think about how do we get people to move, which really is what marketing is all about. Advertising, as you know, is just one lever that we pull in the four P's if you think of it that way. But there are other ways that marketing communicators can add value to the value chain that requires us moving beyond making beautiful Faberger eggs that get people's attention. I think more so how do we design for behavioral adoption? Which is one reason why I wrote the book is that if we can understand the underlying physics that govern human behavior, then we can leverage those things to inform how we put things in the world across all the media surfaces, be it television, print, out of home, and every other sort of communicative object at our disposal, then we can get people to adopt behavior in a meaningful way that it becomes much more important to the shareholders, much more important to the sea suite that are making decisions on behalf of the company. Would you advise a young person to go into the industry world right now? It depends on what they want to do. I would tell them that if you want to make ads going to advertising, if you want to move people that you'd be very, very careful about which agencies you go to and think about all the options at your disposal. You know, I work at the University of Michigan, Ross School of Business, and I hear students say, I'm really interested in marketing. I love the creative process. I love putting things in the world, and they go, cool, and they say, you know, how do I get into the ad world? It's like, that's just one option. There are many, many, many options because there are many, many ways by which you can quote unquote advertise the ideas to transcend the creation of communicative objects and think about how do we create stimuli? How do we create these catastrophes that get people to move? And that requires having a much greater proximity to people. And I would actually argue that's probably one of the most paradoxical things of technology that we have more data than ever before, dreams and dreams and dreams and dreams and dreams and dreams, the data that we've aggregated in an exponential rate. However, our ability to extract insight from said data has only grown marginally. And that's because we mistake information for intimacy. And those old marketers of the day, those advertisers of the day, the league clouds of the world, the Dan Widen's of the world, those guys spend a lot of time investing themselves in the cultural context of the consumer, of the audience. And they're able to create things that weren't just communicating the value propositions of a product, but they were actually cultural productions that people would use to express their identity, i.e. 1984 or for Apple or just do it for Nike. I said, weed in Kennedy. It's actually widened Kennedy. Yeah, but it's okay. You think I'd, if you were German, it'd be so it's okay to get that shit right. So you're a young man, but you've been in the industry about what about 15 years? About 20 years 20 years. So as a person of color, do you think the industry has gotten better, worse or the same for people of color? I think that there is, there are a lot of veneer in that the numbers don't look great for us. If they grown, they've grown marginally. But we look at the leadership within our industry. We are quite anemic. We aren't there. There aren't very many people who are chief strategy officers at agencies. There aren't very many chief creative officers. There aren't very many presidents and CEOs that are people of color, which to me, I think is concerning because we leverage so much of the predominant black cultural product to make our brands cool, to make them interesting, to make them appeal to quote unquote the younger consumer. And though we use the capital, the cultural capital of people of color, we don't put them in places where they're making decisions or they're benefiting from the financial windfall of the production that comes from people who look like me. Anyway, that's problematic. That last question, you have a magic wand. What would you change about our culture in America? I would pray and wish that we could just be much more empathetic. I think it ultimately starts with realizing that your worldview is not objective. In fact, there is no objective worldview. Like each one of us operate by different meaning frames based on our cultural subscription, right? For some, a cow is leather, for others is dating, for some it's dinner. Well, which one is it? What's all of them based on how we see the world, based on the ideologies and the beliefs that we hold. Therefore, the way you see the world may seem true to you, but your truth isn't, Scott's truth. So when I bump into Scott and I bump into you, it's not about me affixing my worldview on to you. It's me understanding how you see the world. Even if I don't agree, I can say I get it. So long as your worldview doesn't mean my oppression, all good, but that requires tremendous empathy, and that we just don't have a lot of. I think that we had a little bit more of that. I think we'd see a lot less marginalization of people, and I think that we would probably see a much more civil world than we're in. So just taking that down one level, how do you encourage and create more empathy in a culture? Get it walking in shoes that aren't your own and see through lenses that aren't your own. And you got to get outside of our bubble. And our bubble, back to technology, technology does a great job of fortifying the walls that is our echo chamber. And we live in echo chambers. We just do, right? If you are a liberal, you do not have starch, Republican friends. You just don't, you just don't have them, right? But it's not until we have discourse conversations with people who aren't from our world that we start to see how they see the world. Otherwise, we go, those people crazy, right? Those people don't know nothing. Those people insane. But they're not just operating by a different meaning system. And if we understand that, then we'll do a better job of being a little bit more human. Dr. Marcus Collins serves as the head of strategy at Wyden Kennedy, New York, and as a clinical assistant professor of marketing at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. Marcus is also a recipient of advertising ages 40 under 40 award and inductee into the American Advertising Federation Advertising Hall of Achievement and the author of the new book for the culture, the power behind what we buy, what we do, and who we want to be. He joins us from Austin, but lives in Ann Arbor. Dr. Collins, Professor Collins, appreciate your time. Thank you so much, Scott. Appreciate it. This episode is produced by Caroline Schaden. Jennifer Sanchez is our associate producer and true boroughs is our technical director. Thank you for listening to the project pod from the Vox Media Podcast Network. We will catch you on Saturday for No Mercy, No Malice as read by George Han and on Monday with our weekly market show.