Adtherapy runs a series of workshops with Marketers called "Creative Fitness."
It is a programme designed to help marketers to get the best out of their agencies, by understanding the process and the key components in getting from good to great advertising.
We look at the briefing process. We interrogate how to generate insights. We look at what happens to a client brief once inside the agency (the creative brief).
We talk about the creative 'tap' - how we want it to be open as that's when you get the best value for money - when the best creative brains want to work on your business. The 'creative tap' closes when there are too many reverts or when the feedback is too prescriptive and it becomes ' give them what they want so we can get it out of here'. That's not good use of your money. The hourly rate is the same whether the tap is open or closed!
So we talk about building relationships and learning how to evaluate ideas/executions in order to give feedback that is constructive and inspirational.
All good stuff, right? (You can read more about the programme here.)
Having run a number of them this year, I thought it might be fun to reflect on the Aha! moments that come of the exercises we ask the delegates to do. These usually come out when we ask our Monday Question: so, what are you going to do differently on Monday?
(Source: www.garfield.com)
In no particular order, here are the most often uttered Aha!s:
I'm going to give my agency more time.
I'm going to spend more time planning, and writing, my brief.
I'm going to keep my briefs shorter.
I'm going to look for the good in a creative presentation, not just look for what's wrong.
I'm going to 'market marketing' inside my organisation.
I'm going to look for deeper consumer insights.
I'm going to spend more time talking to consumers.
I'm going to make time to do the brand work that isn't clearly articulated at the moment.
I'm going to make my briefs inspiring.
I'm going to learn how to evaluate ads so I can have the language to give constructive feedback.
I'm going to set up what the brief was and who the target market is before I ask someone in the corridor whether they like the ad.
I'm going to collate feedback from everyone involved so we limit reverts.
I'm going to spend more time looking at great work so I understand what it looks like.
I'm going to be less prescriptive.
I'm going to build a stronger relationship with my agency.
And there are more. Marketers realise how hard it is when confronted by a brief and a blank page. They realise how much harder it is when given too little information. They also have an aha! about how difficult it is to choose the best option when presented with a pile of ideas. That shows them the value of the Creative Director, the job he or she performs and the unique skill-set they have. Image courtesy of adamr/FreeDigitalPhotos.net. At the end of the programme, we find that there is a renewed sense of excitement about their ability to do great work. A renewed commitment to their role in providing the inputs to the agency that will lead to that great work. And a renewed promise to work with their agencies in a way that will no doubt prove invaluable to the most important person in the process: the consumer. What these learnings also show me is the pressure points in this tricky space between logic and magic, between expectation and delivery, in an area that is super subjective. Maybe if marketers used these Aha's as a How To list, things could work a whole lot better? For more information about the Creative Fitness Programme, or to find out more about Adtherapy's other training, mentoring and consulting programmes, visit www.adtherapy.co.za or better yet contact Gillian: m: 0832659099 or email gillian@adtherapy.co.za
It's 2015 and already the year is galloping by. The relationship with your ad agency or client that might have started wearing thin towards the end of last year, may now be basking in the ever fading glow of the summer holiday. But as the tan fades, and you both start feeling crushed by the relentless torrent of work, so too may the renewed desire to play nicely. It might just be time to do a Client-Agency intervention.
Image courtesy of holohololand at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
An Adtherapy Client-Agency Relationship Intervention is a positive and constructive process that aims to review and learn from the challenges that are getting in the way of doing great work. And to then ensure the right processes and partnership principles are applied for each party.
The ultimate aim? A successful business partnership that produces great creative work for the brand.
The relationship between a Marketer (Client) and an Agency is often compared to a marriage. Although procurement people have tried to muscle in on the dating and wedding processes, the truth is that the relationship is between the people in the bed together, so to speak. This relationship has its ups and downs, and the primary reason for the “marriage” analogy is that it veers from moments of great joy to the depths of despair; from compromise to utterly unreasonable; is prone to emotional and subjective responses, blame and above all, is always high risk.
There are a number of companies offering tools (e.g. Y-Care, RAM) to help ad agencies and their marketing clients assess the status of their professional relationship. These are usually survey based and can be done on an ongoing basis, a few times a year or even just once a year as an annual assessment.
The assessments are usually mutual – agency scores marketing team and marketing team scores agency. The assessments flag areas of high and low performance and hopefully shed some light on those areas that one or both parties need to continue, or need to improve, if the relationship is to be the best it can be.
The assessments will highlight key success areas, and urgent issues that need to be addressed. Unless the agency and the marketing team take immediate steps to address these issues, the relationship is heading for the rocks. A friend I once worked with was married to a divorce attorney. He said this:
“once a divorce file is opened, it’s never closed”.
Once doubt settles in, frustration builds, trust falls and the divorce file is metaphorically opened.
So, it's a no-brainer that both marketing and agency teams would assign the highest priority to getting the problem areas sorted, right? Although it sounds simple, sometimes these areas are not improved, or even addressed. You may well wonder why this happens, when improving these areas has such important ramifications for both businesses and such dire consequences if not done?
Who knows, but I’ll hazard a few guesses:
Because it falls into Steven Covey’s Important but Not Urgent box? No-one will be harping on this on a daily basis and so it slips through the cracks while the urgency and noise of the day job takes priority?
Because addressing the issues might rock the boat and the agency thinks it might destabilize the relationship and they might lose the business?
Because the parties don't know how to fix the problems?
Because one party expects the other party to change completely while they change nothing?
Because no. 4 is allowed to happen because of no 2?
Because one or both parties don’t take the measurements seriously, or thinks its all the other party's fault anyway?
That's why Adtherapy starting offering Agency-Client Interventions, running successfully since 2007. The current relationship's appraisal 'score', and the key issues that have been identified, are only the starting point.
A client once asked what the ‘success rate’ was in Agency-Client Interventions. Interesting question. In all those that I have done, I have only recommended one partnership to split, as the relationship had deteriorated beyond what I felt was salvageable. Was that a failure? I think not – maintaining a destructive client-agency relationship is toxic for all parties and especially destructive for the end creative product. That agency and that client went on to find new partners with whom they have done great work.
The reason why Client-Agency Interventions are like marriage counseling is that they examine whether it’s possible to improve the relationship to save it, and how.
Just so you know, the IPA recently concluded that four drivers of successful agency-client relationships are:
Transparent and effective approval processes
Mutually agreed and maintained timing plans.
Honest and open briefings with clear business objectives, budget, timing and brand guidelines.
Respectful and collaborative behaviours built on shared goals and rewards.
The most important thing is this: like the divorce lawyer’s sad observation, the sooner this counseling takes place the better for the eventual outcome of the partnership.
My advice? Don’t wait till it blows up.
Deal with it urgently. Get stuck in. You can do it yourself, or you can let us help. We can add a qualitative and interpretive (and totally objective) layer to what you already know but might not think you can do anything about. Let’s scope some Partnership Principles and deal with any process or people issues. Let’s be proactive rather than defensive.
An Adtherapy Client-Agency Relationship Intervention is a positive and constructive process that aims to learn from the relationship challenges and ensure that the right partnership principles are applied for each party.
The ultimate aim? A successful business partnership that produces the best work. A recent client described the process as 'part agony aunt, part freedom fighter'. We like that.
I read Wallop recently, the recollections of Bob Rightford, Brian Searle-Tripp and Roger Makin about the ad agency they built: Rightford Searle-Tripp Makin (RSTM). The agency became Ogilvy Mather-RSTM and is now simply called Ogilvy.
Disclaimer - Bob Rightford is my father in law.
In my 25+ years in the ad business, I didn't ever work for the company, either during Bob's tenure or after his retirement. I did however work for a few of their competitors. So reading the book was like peering in through a window. It was fascinating to look inside, from the outside.
What is also fascinating is to use the book as a then and now comparison.
No-one can deny they not only made great creative ads, they also helped their clients build strong brands and strong businesses. If you go to the Golden Oldies page of the website, it truly is a chronicle of the foundations of some of our biggest and most loved brands.
What? Creative ads that also built business? I cringe when I hear marketers expressing surprise or cynicism in that notion. Firstly, a creative ad is only great if it achieves the objectives set out in the brief. And secondly, there is more than enough evidence (see the research in The Case for Creativity) that creative ads have a far better chance of achieving better commercial results. So it should be a no-brainer for businesses to want the best creative from their agencies. And for agencies to constantly strive to provide groundbreaking ideas.
And yet, at the nub of so many agency-client relationship issues is this notion of the agency not "adding value", not bringing "thought leadership" nor "business building ideas" to their clients. Many marketers feel that their agencies simply don't understand their business and aren't business focused enough. Bear in mind that CEO's of businesses even feel their CMO's aren't business focused enough! (see this Fournaise research). So the disconnect from CEO to CMO to agency, and ultimately to the creative output and the agency-client relationship, is massive.
What Wallop shows us is that RSTM managed to connect rather than be disconnected. They formed deep relationships with their clients, many of which persist to this day, long after Bob, Brian and Roger retired. They built a company culture, one which the current Ogilvy team respects and builds upon. They attracted great people. They did great work. The work they did created foundations for brands that grew from strength to strength. And because of all that, and a few other things they got right, their agency grew from strength to strength.
So how did they achieve this holy grail?
I took some lessons out of the book - looking at what they did then, in the light of some of the challenges the industry faces now. Sure, the industry is different and remuneration models are tougher and client structures are harder to crack and people are busier and labour law is more stringent and.... There are loads of reasons why it could be said that it is much harder to succeed in advertising now than it was then. And yet. And yet... There are agencies that are succeeding. And I would hazard a guess that the lessons I gleaned, listed below, will be old hat to them. Different era, same principles.
Here are the lessons, in no particular order, I digested from the book. I think they're important for the industry of today - both marketing side and agency side.
1. Strong connection with the CEO and Marketing Director
The relationship between Bob Rightford and the CEO's of their client's companies, as well as the Marketing Directors, was strong, close and even bordered on brutal honesty. There was no kowtowing and second guessing. The depth of these relationships allowed for difficult conversations, allowed for respect to grow, and allowed for the right work to be produced.
Over the years an insidious culture has crept into the industry that CEO's are too important for marketing issues, and particularly advertising issues. Agency MD's and CEO's bemoan they have lost their seat at the Top Table. So, the relationship has been pushed further down and it lands somewhere at Marketing Manager-Account Director level. This is fine on a functional, timeline, project management basis, but it certainly won't build the kind of business successes that a strong relationship further up, or right at the top, will.
Another odd notion amongst agency account management or MD's that their job is "to keep the client happy", to not rock the boat, in case they lose the business. The irony is if they continue with that approach, they will lose the business anyway.
An agency is not there to keep the client happy. The agency is there to do great work which helps the client company achieve their marketing objectives. Sometimes, because of the subjective nature of creativity and innovation, that requires some boat rocking. And Wallop tells plenty of stories in that regard. All with happy endings.
2. Absolute loyalty to client's products.
Bob Rightford retired in 1995. Twenty years later, to this day, he remains fiercely loyal to his former clients' brands. And this brand loyalty was expected from everyone at RSTM.
Of course, not only is this polite, but it turns agency staff into consumers. The insights gleaned, the selling cycle, the product highs and lows are experienced by the people working on the business. It also takes you further into the clients value chain, into the real understanding of issues that might affect the consumer. You will seldom get this in a brief. The example in the book about VW's dealers and the campaigns they developed to help them as businesses too, is a great example, particularly as the agency had to fight hard to get it made.
3. A deep understanding of the client's business, on every level and in every channel. No lines.
This follows on from the point above. But it was more than that. A slavish devotion to understanding every aspect of the client, from factory visits to store visits, competitive analyses (actual, on foot, not just Google), speaking to other channels in the selling cycle, like Dealers in the example above.
This built the ability to develop powerful insights. It allows the agency to access insights into the purchase behaviour of consumers that clients may be too close to, to see. Great campaigns usually have a cracker insight at their core. Also out of insight comes proactivity. Insights inspire new product concepts, new angles to address problems, new distribution options. And here's the thing - far from losing the business by forcing your clients to confront unpleasant truths, you not only help build their business, but also build the agency's business. In effect the VW Dealers became a new client, with additional revenue opportunities for the agency.
Too many agencies rely on their clients to give them insights. Too many marketers rely on their "Insights department" to give them insights, which is often just information. Too many of us are using the internet, or big data or third party research to tell us what people are doing. If you as an agency member are actively using, buying, driving, drinking your client's product every day, and making sure you watch others who do too, you'll be certain to stumble across an insight or two, way quicker than from behind your desk.
This deep understanding of the business your client is in, is also so critical in today's multi-channel communications era. No longer is it simply above- or below- the line. Now we have a million more silos. Digital. Social. Experiential. Activation. Shopper. Retail. Online, offline. Third screen. Fourth Screen. And you know what - the consumer doesn't see it that way. There is no line. Only a consumer wanting, or not, to buy something.
4. Proactivity is not a cute tactical ad. It builds value for the client company. Business value.
The best example of this in the book, and there are many, was the creation by the agency of the Citi Golf concept. Like the VW Dealership campaign, the agency fought for this, based on a real understanding of the market and a nose for opportunity. Asking "What if?" Not only did it build immense value for the client over many years, it again built a new revenue and creative opportunity for the agency. Oh, and created a brand that South Africans adored. Watch how consumers said an emotional goodbye when eventually VW discontinued the Citi Golf, in the link below.
5. They looked after their most important assets - their people.
Bob says they liked to say that their most important assets went down the elevators and out the front door at night. Wallop tells the story of a company that looked after their people. Were they relentless? Yes. Were they demanding and did they fire people? Sure. But it seems they did a few things right.
One, they created a culture where mavericks wanted to work. They attracted them and then they hired them when no-one else would. Agencies are not "corporates" and despite the best efforts of global holding companies and accountants in trying to turn them into corporately behaved businesses, they can't be, shouldn't be and won't ever be.
More than this they looked after their people - one example was when they fired a big big big Client because the junior marketing person was slowly sucking the life out of the creative department refers. Your people are your assets. And if they're depressed, your asset loses its immense value.
In my Adtherapy work, I see people in agencies dying in the trenches without management support. I see Account Management being mowed down by rude and disrespectful (and unskilled) clients; I see Creatives with hunched shoulders, working till 3am night after night and being expected to be creative the next day. This cannot be. The success of any agency lies in keeping your talented people inspired and motivated (and employed by you not your competitor). Sometimes this means you have to go to war for them.
RSTM helped their people grow too. They invested in training. They ran successful workshop programmes which not only allowed people to bond and create friendships but also to hone their skills. Sadly in many agencies this is an expense that has been cut. Talk about not doing the cost-benefit analysis properly. Better skills make better business.
Another aspect of looking after their people was building a culture in which every person felt they played a part. An open attitude to where ideas come from. A shared interest in the campaign being sold and working well. Too many agencies use polarising language that put people in siloes. Like Creatives talking to Account Management about "Your Client", and Account Management discussing "Your Work" with Creatives. This book highlights a time and a culture where everyone was invested in the client getting the best work. Everyone cared. So the Clients did too.
6. Strong, focused (and aligned) leadership.
This was an interesting one, because it plays out so well in the agencies that are successful today. Strong leadership is required in order to have the difficult conversations that are so necessary in this business, both internally and with clients, suppliers and others. But aligned leadership is even more important. The leaders at the top being on the same page.
Bob says "we knew the type of work we wanted to do, and worked together to make that happen". It was never about the money, or keeping business, or meeting budgets. It was about the work. And that was across the board. Too many Account Management and MD's in my opinion believe its okay to throw the work under the wheels and rather do what the client wants. "Keep the peace and collect the cash". Short-term thinking.
7. A company wide commitment to aim higher than you ever thought was possible.
This comes through in the commitment to "the work, the work, the work". It was quite simply all about the work. And the question was asked - is it good enough? Work was developed, it was crafted, it was made better. Always. And the best suppliers, the best film makers, the most impossible ideas were made possible. Which made them great.
Somehow in this era of time-sheets and budget cuts and reduced margins, this commitment and passion for excellence falls by the way. Work is "okay" enough to leave the building. There's an air of compromise. Suppliers are chosen based on staying in budget. And maybe that's just the way of the world. But funnily enough, big ideas generally make big returns that make up for the expense upfront. Not just in advertising - in business. But it takes courage to motivate for that upfront investment. Lesson: be bold and brave. Be courageous.
8. An ethical compass - politically and personally.
The book starts with how Bob got fired from a previous company for what was deemed to be a 'bribe'. This drove his unwavering enforcement of ethics in the company that he, Brian and Roger sought to build. Their ethics came through in how they treated people, it came through in wanting to do the right thing politically, it came through in ensuring that the agency was above board in everything they did.
What agencies don't always understand is that their clients are distrustful of them anyway. Advertising is expensive. Clients imagine that agencies are crooking the books. Dodgy business practices seek only to weaken the industry and have no place in the relationships that need to be built in order to get great work.
9. Fun, more fun and then more on top of that.
People who have never worked in advertising think it's one long party. In fact I had a rule never ever to hire anyone who started an interview with "I've always wanted to work in advertising". It's a relentless, tough, ego-smashing, challenging, sometimes impossible, sometimes soul destroying, job, and it takes a certain type of person to thrive and excel in that space.
It involves long hours and lots of arguments and tempers and yet there is also lots of laughter. People who work in advertising generally have great senses of humour (thank heavens). Part of RSTM's success was creating an environment where people could have fun. Where they could let their hair down, and laugh or cry and run naked across the rooftop, then dust themselves off for another great day at the office.
10. They made money.
Agencies have a tough time these days in between being told what their hourly rates can be, what deliverables they can and can't charge for, how big the logo should be, in addition to marketing budgets being divided amongst more and more specialist agencies or going in-house. Applying all of the nine points above would be pointless without making enough money to pay your talent well, have decent premises, invest in training and inspirational activities and grow a great business.
What comes through in Wallop is that their mission was never "how do we get rich"? There was never a plan to build a great culture because that would make them money. Instead there was a fanatical obsession with making the very best advertising they could for their clients, and an obsession about helping their clients solve their business challenges. And that, in the end, helped them make money.
Valuable lessons.
So, those are ten thoughts from three veterans who were part of putting South Africa on the international map of advertising, that I feel are useful to ponder. I'm sure there are more.
Read the book, reminisce about ads you (or your parents) might remember on the website.
But above all, think about the basic principles:
Agency: Focus on the creative product and look after your people.
Marketer: Invest in relationships with your ad agency at the top and let them be creative.
Adtherapy's mantra is better skills, better relationships, better results. We have a number of ways in which we work with agencies and marketers to make that happen. Read our website www.adtherapy.co.za to see some examples. Better yet, mail gillian@adtherapy.co.za or phone 0832659099 to chat about how we can help you.
I recently ran a pitch for a company that was seen as a highly desirable account in the industry because of the calibre of the work they had done. I don't often run pitches, mainly because I hate the standard pitch process. But I told the client that I thought there was an opportunity to do one differently - especially as their brand had a certain cachet, but more importantly because their company culture was refreshingly uncluttered and open, and the partnership with an agency was something they regarded as extremely important.
So the first thing we did was to call it an "Agency Engagement Process", not a Pitch. Semantics yes, but getting engaged, or engaging with someone, just feels like a more appealing prospect than 'pitching" which, let's face it means throwing a ball at someone's face as hard as you can.
image courtesy vectorolie | freedigitalphotos.net
Then we designed a Request for Information (RFI) that was one and a half pages long. No realms of financial information required, no hourly rates per each employee, no names of pets previously owned. Just simple questions, and even an emotional one: what is it about our account that makes you think you would be the right agency to partner with us? We asked whether there were any interesting facts about the Agency that we might not know, and then we asked them to submit the creative work of which they were most proud.
Oh, and when I say 'we' designed, I mean the client was deeply involved in the design and application process. This was no 'cut and paste' tick-box process.
We outlined the process we were planning to follow, and we agreed upfront that we would be transparent and open with all the agencies involved throughout the process. We also agreed the criteria, and the level of importance of each one.
Interestingly the winning agency's MD referred to it as an "empathetic pitch process". Yes it was.
Another feature of this "empathetic" pitch was that we were determined to give each agency detailed feedback, and to answer as many questions as they wanted to ask.
When we had gone through the submissions, we communicated (quickly) with the successful and unsuccessful agencies. The unsuccessful ones who wanted to know why they hadn't made it could ask, and I would tell them. Many of them said it was the best (if not, only) feedback they'd had during a pitch, and it was really useful. Pitches are time consuming and expensive. Why shouldn't agencies be able to use them as a learning process? Even though each client or prospective client and pitch situation is different, there may be some simple things that are screwing up the agency's chances of winning the business. For the work that agencies put in to pitches (usually free, or for a pittance), the absolute bare minimum should be some constructive feedback. IMHO.
After evaluating the RFI's from the long list, we selected five agencies for a short list. They were each invited to a Chemistry Session. The first date.
image courtesy Stuart Miles, freedigitalphotos.net
Before the meeting, we sent the five shortlisted agencies some thought starters in terms of areas they might want to research and have an opinion on. We suggested that they stay away from PowerPoint and bring the people that would work on the business.
The chemistry meetings were illuminating! I'll talk about the 'don't's' below, but overall it gave us an excellent way of discerning who to take into the next round.
After evaluating the agencies against the pre-agreed criteria (and after a rigorous, open and fair debate amongst the key stakeholders), we selected three agencies. There was no "done-deal". Each stakeholder had a different ranking of the 'favourites'. What made this process so unique too was that the key stakeholders in the business, right to the top, were involved in all the debates and meetings, from the beginning to the end, and each had an equal say. The Marketing Director, who was running the process, had a casting vote, if needed.
The brief to the last three agencies was to work towards a Tissue Session, off a detailed brief. We wanted them to suggest a possible "creative platform" that the client could build their next campaign around. We stressed that they were not to develop 'ads', but that this was a test not only of their strategic and creative abilities, it was a test of how they worked with the client in the three weeks leading up to the tissue session.
Why do it this way?
Because if creative work is presented, the client might buy the right idea on the day, not the right team. And given that most work presented in pitches never sees the light of day (I reckon it's about 99%), and it's done totally in isolation of the marketing team, why choose a team on the pitch work? Beats me.
image courtesy of pakorn freedigitalphotos.net
During this Tissue Session process, the client had many working sessions with each agency, got an inside view of how they worked with their clients, and worked with actual client service people (who are almost invisible in the pitch process, yet so vital in the running of an account). The client also flew to see offices in other cities, and had the opportunity to meet production teams and other support staff. Again, the process was transparent, and questions were asked and answered as they came up.
Finally, the Tissue Session day was upon us. The responses to the brief were different and interesting and gave us all food for thought. It was clear on entering each agency's meeting room, that there was already a relationship between the client team and each agency - it wasn't a case of meeting people for the first time on the pitch day. Even the senior execs in the room had met the agency team at the Chemistry meeting. The meetings felt comfortable even though there was a lot at stake.
In the end, in my opinion, the best fit for the client was the agency that won the business. And funnily enough, the thing that probably swung it was a conversation about the client's business away from the traditional advertising space - the agency had researched all aspects of the business and was able to comment on an activation concept and provide insight that excited the client.
So, why write this post? A number of learnings made themselves clear to me - what the client did right, and what agencies should try not to do in pitches. As I said above, every pitch is different, but hopefully these can help.
Things I think worked well
Image courtesy iosphere freedigitalphotos.net
Care was taken not to waste people's time with the RFI. It was kept short for a reason: why waste agencies' (valuable) time when they might not make it through?
Enough time was allocated to each step - there was plenty of time to complete RFI's, prepare for the Chemistry Sessions, and for the final Tissue Session. Yes some pitches may be urgent, but what can a marketer possibly gain by rushing this process?
The process was open and transparent - most questions asked, were answered. To help the client find time to do his day job, I was given the task of handling these - and was happy to give advice, guidance, and talk people off window ledges. I've been in huge pitches were no contact with the client was allowed between a group briefing, with all the competing agencies in the same room, to the presentation - horrible. And unconstructive.
Detailed feedback was given to both successful and unsuccessful agencies, which I hope (given some of their comments) will help them learn and improve in upcoming pitches.
Evaluation criteria were shared, and feedback was given according to those criteria.
Top management involvement was key - in each and every meeting, even internal debates, from the beginning to the end. The most senior executive expressed amazement that there are pitches in which the CEO doesn't get involved. "Why would they not want to be involved, when it's such an important decision for the business?"
A lot of additional research took place - the client and I spoke to many other people about the agencies - TV directors, other clients, staff, other suppliers.
The incumbent agency was involved and gave advice to other agencies and to client and me. This was a bit weird and probably wouldn't work in the case where a pitch is called because of a breakdown in relationship between agency and client - but it worked in this case - the best interests of the client were top of mind.
Things I think agencies should bear in mind for their next pitch
Answer the brief (even if it's a brief for a meeting), creatively. The winning agency devised a technique for directing the flow of conversation in the Chemistry Meeting that was clever, simple and creative. The impression created was that if they can think that strategically and creatively for a meeting, then they've got to be good.
Follow the instructions - they are there for a reason! We said 'no PowerPoint", as the client is allergic to PowerPoint's. What happened? Two out the five 'dates', in the Chemistry Sessions - plugged in PowerPoint. I also use PowerPoint, but here's what I learned - it changes the dynamic in the room. It stops people talking to each other as they turn to look at the screen and they listen without engaging with the speaker. Most interesting for me, was that when they plugged a laptop in, it lowered the lights in the room. Then when the PP was done, the discussion took place in a gloomy light. The effect on the 'chemistry' in the room was staggering.
Cartoon courtesy of the remarkable Tom Fishburne @marketoonist
Consider carefully who to bring with. One of the agencies had someone present something (see how discreet I'm being) which somewhat annoyed one of the clients. When I gave them this feedback, the agency said "oh no, but he's leaving anyway'. What would have happened if he was the star of the show, only for the client to find out at the end of the process that he was leaving? Bring the best people, but make sure if the brief says "bring the people who will work on the business", that's who you bring. If you have to hire to handle the business, say so. Keep the group small. Make sure everyone has a role in the meeting. But make sure the core team in the meeting will be there for the client afterwards.
Make sure your credentials are relevant to the needs of the Client's business. If you are linked to a global network and have offices in 300 countries and several small planets, consider whether that is in fact relevant, impactful and interesting to the client. I find a lot of agency credentials talk about the agency - yes that's a good thing - but do what you do best. Craft a persuasive message. Define your benefit. Find an insight about your target audience (the prospective client), ask what will encourage them to appoint you. I promise you a standard credentials show ain't going to do it. Bear in mind too, that by the time the client sees you, if he's done his work properly (as was the case in this one), he (or she) knows all that stuff anyway. They've read your submission, they've been on to your website etc. Your job is to answer the WIIFM* question (*What's in it for me?)
Do your research. Introduce some category or brand insights. But and this is a big but. Don't tell them what they already know. Because, worst case, you might get it wrong. If it's about competitors - they probably already know what their competitors are saying and what their positionings are. Add a layer to it that they won't know. Frame it differently. Bring consumer insights that will surprise them, rather than the obvious ones that they may have worked with. I realize this is difficult - because as Donal Rumsfield said "there are things we don't know we don't know". You don't know what they know - but be sensible about it. If you there marketing person of that company, would you know this - or do you think it's an Aha observation?
Find a role for account management. Almost every agency had a 'tag on' account management person, yet the client had rated this is a very important part of the search criteria. Especially in a process like this, the client wanted a sense of how compatible the account management person was with the key members of the team. If the account management person sits in a corner with a mouth full of teeth, that's hard to gauge. And yes Creative Directors, I'm looking at you on this one. Let them play a role - a team role, not a support role. The client wants and needs to see it, because as much as they might love you, they aren't going to be speaking to you 87 times a day.
And - show your soul. The question we asked "what is it about our account that makes you think your agency is the right agency to partner us" gave us some hilarious answers ("because it's nearly awards season"... seriously) but also showed us some incredible insight from agencies that might not have otherwise been considered. It's an engagement process - be engaging.
And finally...
Make sure that you want the client for the right reasons. Is it right for your business? Does it suit your team's expertise, what you love doing, the type of work you want to do, the categories you know and love. Because if it's just for the money, chances are the whole process is going to have to be redone too soon.
Adtherapy is a consulting and advertising skills-building company that is on a quest to #ridtheworldofbadadvertising
Agencies:
Call me if you want advice on your new business pitch strategy, your credentials presentation, your positioning. Or if you just want to chat.
Marketers:
Call me if you want to discuss finding a new agency. I'll probably start by asking you if you can make the current relationship work better, and may help you with that. But if you can't, then I'd be happy to work through a process like this with you. Bear in mind though - the success was partly the process, and mostly the involvement from the client. So you'll have to work with me.
Well, what a relief that the endless stream of sun-dappled beach and cafe pictures, with the obligatory cocktail or glass of pink Chateau Quleque-chose in the foreground, are over. Back to the real world for the lot of you.
Pic Courtesy Arlene Donnenburg.
Not that I'm envious at all. I managed to save my South African Rands, and still watched some great seminars from the comfort of my heated office in freezing Cape Town. And I didn't have a hangover once. So given that I was a virtual voyeur of the Festivale, which used to be called the International Advertising Festival and now is known as the somewhat loftier International festival of Creativity, I have a few learnings, observations, musings, mutterings.
The first is the mobile is where it will be, and the developing world has the most opportunity. Watch Keith Weed from Unilever's views here The second is that ideas still matter. More than ever. The third is that the name should revert to the Festival of Advertising, not Festival of Creativity. Just because it's a 3-D billboard, or a prosthetic arm, or an App that looks after your kids on the beach doesn't mean that somehow it's stopped being advertising.
MegaFon's MegaFaces Billboard at the Sochi Olympics
This is not a festival for pure creative, because that would then encompass art, and graffiti and music and film and books and a whole bunch of other creative pursuits. This is creativity in service of business. It's creativity that is helping brands grow. And that, in my humble view, is called Advertising. Of course Sir John Hegarty said it best - listen to his view on this point here.
Another point is that many of the winners were familiar work, already. Both the Grand Prix Winners for Film had already been seen many times; in the case of Volvo Trucks over 73 million times. Fourth learning: great work gets shared. Great work is amplified. T'was ever thus, but so much more powerful today.
But for my fifth and I think most interesting learning, back to my headline. An article in the USA Today had this headline "Incredibly Unusual Ads take Top Cannes Awards". Which got me thinking - why are they unusual? Awards shows are always controversial, but unusual? Are the winners any good?
And that's the beauty of Cannes.
Whatever the festival is called. Because it forces those of us in the pursuit of great advertising to challenge our notions of what great looks like. And to share in the choices of experienced judging panels. And to ponder and wonder what they saw in those pieces, and why the mood of the winners feels quite different to the winners last year. And whether we personally think they're good or great. And that's the greatest learning of all. Everyone in the business of marketing communication needs to constantly review, question, discuss, have a point of view. Watch the seminars. Learn. Listen. Grow. That's the practice needed to constantly get better at this. Btw, the journalist of the "Unusual Ads win Cannes" story, quotes:
The Harvey Nichols "Sorry I Spent It on Myself" campaign focuses on people who buy their loved ones inexpensive holiday gifts, such as rubber bands and paper clips that come in Harvey Nichols-branded packaging, so they can spend more on themselves.
The retailer actually sold the cheap, unusual presents featured in its ad — and sold out in just under three days.
Harvey Nichols' advertising approach was "brave" and "flew in the face of convention around holiday advertising," said film jury member Pete Favat, who is the chief creative officer at ad agency Deutsch LA, in Los Angeles. "For a retailer to take their highest-selling season and do something like this is remarkably bold."
Brave, bold, convention-breaking, successful. Those have always been hallmarks of great advertising. So not really unusual at all. The only unusual bit is that so few marketers will make this type of work.
To summarise.
My brain is full. My heart is inspired. Onwards brave warriors. Do your best. Because in the end, everybody wins.
Adtherapy is a consulting and advertising skills-building company that is on a quest to #ridtheworldofbadadvertising
Contact Gillian on gillian@adtherapy.co.za if you want to join the quest, or want some advice on how to make better advertising.Or you can follow, chat on Twitter @grightford@grightford
A fascinating debate took place on Twitter last night, initiated and facilitated by the team at Adlip, on the subject of whether "agency services have become mere commodities".
It was short, sweet and full of as much insight as one can get across in 140 characters. (Read the full #Adlip Talk Twitter TL here)
The general answer, was "no, well, maybe, but.." It was an industry view, and missing the voice of the one person who really can answer: the marketer him or her self.
Of course there is no Yes or No answer to this question. Frankly, a lot depends on the agency's abilities and on the marketer's skills. But the question that does have a simple answer is "has the business changed"? Yes it has. There are a myriad options available to marketers - but that in itself is not necessarily a good thing for them.
What is happening, especially given South Africa's small market, is that each agency wants to capture as much of the pie as possible, so that many agencies are trying to do all things for all people.
But if we all do the same thing, we do become commodities, and it does become a case of "well, I can get exactly the same thing from those guys, for cheaper. Cool."
Agencies spend their days crafting strategic positioning for clients, marking competitive territory and helping clients defend it. When it comes to their own, they are the cobblers kids with no shoes!
There is no marked differentiation among the major players. The ones that do have a differentiated spot soon begin looking over at the others and wanting to be more like them. The reason that there is commoditisation is that the clients perceive all agencies to look the same, and do the same.
To makes sense of it all, I came across this slide show by the hugely insightful Tim William, on how to really decide what your agency is and does, for whom, in which channels. It's called Auditing Your Agency's Business Model. Take a moment to read it, and even better, take a moment to run through the exercises and charts with your Exco.
Then - make a stand that creates a differentiated, desirable, defensible (and profitable) positioning in the market. Stick to it. And better yet, communicate it and deliver it. Commoditisation gone.
And there are more. Marketers realise how hard it is when confronted by a brief and a blank page. They realise how much harder it is when given too little information. They also have an aha! about how difficult it is to choose the best option when presented with a pile of ideas. That shows them the value of the Creative Director, the job he or she performs and the unique skill-set they have.
