A brand and go-to-market practice inside an engineering company. One person is accountable for what it publishes, the method is written down, and the list of what it will not claim about itself is on this page rather than in a drawer.
A note from the studio
Most of the growth work we are asked to fix was not bad work. It was competent execution of a decision nobody had made. A site redesign with no argument in it. Six channels running at a third of the budget each. A content calendar that was really a list of topics.
So we do it in that order. What are you saying, who is it for, and what would make somebody believe it. Then the identity, the pages, the creative and the sequences, built as a system so the twentieth asset is as good as the first. Then the channels, narrow at first, with the measurement in place before any media budget is spent.
We are part of Thinkscoop, which builds software. That has one useful consequence: when the copy is about your inference costs or your data model, the person writing it can go and get the detail checked instead of reaching for an adjective.
We are not going to dress this page up with borrowed proof or a wall of logos. What we will do on the first call is tell you plainly what we think the problem is, including when the answer is that you do not need us yet.
Wilfred VivekChief Marketing Officer, Thinkscoop Growth
Who leads it
A remit rather than a biography: what this person is accountable for on your engagement, which is the only part of anyone's history you can hold them to.
Chief Marketing Officer
Leads the Growth practice. On an engagement he chairs the session where the positioning gets settled, signs off the message architecture the rest of the work is built against, and is accountable for anything the studio publishes in your name. He is also the person who tells you when we think the brief is the wrong brief.
Who is in the room
One name is published above because one name is what we can evidence. What we can also do is tell you what an engagement is made of, seat by seat, so you can picture the work rather than a logo. No faces, no biographies and no headcount, for the same reason there are no testimonials on this site.
How it is set up
Not the method, which lives on the approach page. This is the structure around it, and it is what actually decides how an engagement feels from your side of the table.
Thinkscoop builds software, and the Growth practice is part of it rather than a partner of it. The useful consequence is narrow but real: when the copy is about your inference costs or your data model, the person writing it can have the detail checked, and a site we design can be built by people who were in the design review.
We ask for the person on your side who can settle a disagreement about strategy, because without one the output gets diluted until it says nothing. In exchange we name ours rather than putting a practice behind an inbox.
Ad accounts, sending domains, analytics and source files are set up under your ownership from the first week, not migrated at the end. Work held inside an agency identity is a way of making leaving expensive, and we do not build it that way.
We are not going to show you a wall of case studies we cannot evidence. What we can show is the artefacts this kind of engagement produces, made for ourselves and published in full, which is what the work page is.
The method, drawn
The same shape whether the brief is a positioning sprint or a channel build. The stages are written out in full on the approach page, with what each one hands over.
exhibit 05
method
One method across all four service lines. Each stage ends in something written, and the count beside each one is the number of named artefacts it hands over.
What we will not claim
These are commitments about our own marketing, not about which briefs we take. If any line here ever stops being true of this site, the honest move is to delete the line first.
The brands on the work page are named because we have run growth work for them, and that is the whole claim. There is no delivery narrative attached, no project name, no date and no team, because we are not going to reconstruct one for a web page.
The sector results we publish were agreed as anonymous and they stay anonymous. Putting them next to a named client would make both look bigger than they are, and it is the single most common piece of dishonesty in this industry.
We have none we can publish, so there are none here, not even the kind attributed to a job title instead of a person. An unattributable quote is a quote somebody wrote in the office.
None of those numbers can be checked from anything we would be willing to show you, so none of them are on the page. What is on the page instead is work you can look at and judge for yourself.
Bring the product, the buyer and what is not landing. You will get a straight read on the problem, including when the answer is that you do not need us yet.
