Is "Rah-Rah" Really Necessary?

Can I just be a quiet leader?  Can I succeed without being a luncheon-going, back-slapping, bombastic salesman?  Can I just be reserved, considerate and kind?  Can I, please?  Do I have to be Steve Jobs reincarnate?

The book Leading Quietly gives me some amount of hope.  But personal experience over 35 years in the ad business squishes that hope just as quickly.  The super-salesman with the toothy smile and quick joke seems to win more often than not.  At least from my perspective that seems to be the case.  So I've worked on developing that toothy smile.  My mouth muscles vehemently object, as does my core persona.  And, honestly, I can't remember jokes or spout instantaneous, witty comebacks.  

Vanilla?  That's me, I suppose.  But I like the taste of vanilla.  I really do.  It's mellow.  It's understated.  It's comfortable.  And from what I read, a whole lot of people like the flavor of vanilla.  Do I smell hope? 

In the meantime, I will lean heavily on the leadership mantra provided in Leading Quietly:

"Modesty.  Restraint.  Tenacity."  I can be that.  I can do that.  And, hopefully, I can win enough battles with that to survive, and maybe even thrive.  

Scarcity.

The only scarcity in a world of abundance is attention.

Specialize or die.

As of two years ago, Crispin/Porter+Bogusky's employee manual said "most people think advertising is magazine ads, TV spots, online banners, billboards and the like.  We think it's anything that makes our client famous.  Traditional advertising is important.  What's arguably more important is the stuff that orbits around the traditional stuff.  Like the message on the company voice mail.  The t-shirt we mail to every employee.  The idea for a great new product.  The bumper sticker every customer gets handed to them on a certain day.  The cool, new website flash page.  The letter to every member of Congress petitioning for a new national holiday. That's how brands are built."

Yep.

It's true agencies, more and more, have to specialize to succeed at a higher, more profitable level.  Especially small agencies in small markets with small clients and small budgets.  Salt Lake City, for example.  Richter7, for instance.  But I speak not of specializing in some facet of the overwhelming digital realm.  I believe we have to specialize in the whole idea of coming up with ideas. 

That's our future.  That's our heritage.  That's what clients can't do very well for themselves.  That's why Questar picked Faktory over us.  They liked their ideas more.  (Ouch, it hurts to say that.)  They didn't say it was about our knowledge of their business, or media buying skills, or research or our web savvy.  We had that in spades.  Instead, they were enamored with some ideas, created by idea specialists – creative guns for hire, who partnered with a separate group that had media buying skills.

Bottom line?  We have to be specialists in coming up with new ideas.  Grand ideas.  Frankly, in the long run, we might not do many ads –- we may find that events, or promotional activities, or concerts, or games, or reality competitions might be the best way to make our client famous.  Media agnostic – that’s a term you’ve heard before.  It must describe us.

As we know, one well-crafted idea that engages people, and has talk value, can take the place of a huge media campaign with boring ads.  And a good idea doesn’t have to cost a lot.  But people with talent do have to think a lot in order to come up with it.  Lack of time is the greatest deterrent to breakthrough ideas, I believe.  This baloney about waiting until a deadline forces me to come up with good ideas is just that, baloney.  Great ideas, and great ads, take great effort and time. 

These days, you might have noticed, anything is advertising.  That’s why to make change happen, creative people have to stop being the only people who think creatively.  Yes, the CD is still the curator of the ideas, but the ideas can come from anyplace – especially the media department.  Because unexpected ways to deliver a message are actually part of the message itself.  Hence, the media department has to be thoroughly drenched in every single possibility the digital world has to offer.  A web campaign (anything non-traditional) can’t just be an adaptation of the TV spot.  All that does is put a TV spot most people don’t want to watch on a website or YouTube.

If we start with an intelligent strategy, and any idea is allowed to emerge from that strategy, we may find it’s more effective to have a knitting competition than to run a TV spot.  Or we end up doing a TV spot about the knitting competition.  That’s how we should be thinking.

What we think are the new tools – the internet, viral, RSS, social apps, email and whatever else comes along that I can’t imagine at this moment in time, aren’t the tools at all.  The “new/old” tool is ideation. If we can’t specialize in doing that well, we’ll go the way of Kodak.

Judging CA's Advertising Annual - The Inside Story

Proof I was at CA's offices, since you probably don't believe me.

The truth, and nothing but the truth -- from my recent CA judging experience:

--judges joined me from Deutsch (LA), BBDO (NY), the Martin Agency, Leo Burnett, Arnold Worldwide,  Goodby, and Bailey Lauerman; all very senior.

--Patrick Coyne, the editor and owner, divided the judges into three rooms of three judges, with employees of CA laying out the work and playing the TV spots for us in each room.

--we reviewed roughly 300 TV spots on Sunday, many quite good.  Some were downright bad.  TV was the strongest category of the show, in my opinion.  Watching it was far more fun than watching Super Bowl spots, because the overall quality, at least of the best spots, was far better.

-- we also reviewed about 500 print pieces on day one.  Times that number by three and you'll get a feel for how much work was reviewed on day one.  Some of the print work was very classy, conceptual and well executed, as you might imagine.  Some were very easy to recognize as freebie, pro bono work that a client would never buy.  That work got rejected by the judges very quickly.  Much of it came from out of the U.S.  Some pieces were beautiful, but not geared to sell in the least, not even a website address on them; those were quickly trashed, too.  By the way, I could not judge any work entered by Richter7, nor could any of the other judges cast votes for their own agency's work.

--all the judges were very cordial, however most of the big-city judges tended to stick together; the two I judged with the first two days heavily laced their conversation with profanity -- lots of f-bombs; many went out for beers at the end of each day, no matter how late we went.

-- best TV: All-State Mayhem, VW, New Era with Alec Baldwin, P&G's ode to mothers, Jet Blue, Coke, Whistler Film Festival (my personal fav featuring a bear rug), and Geico.

-- the videos used to present integrated campaigns are quite elaborate; mini case studies mostly done in Prezi or in AfterEffects; moving type and art elements, big-time music tracks, with results mostly talking about impressions and likes, but, sadly, not sales and share increases.

-- QR codes were mocked.

-- discussions with the other judges in our off-hours leads me to believe the big agencies are struggling with monetizing social, and how to prove its value -- just like we are at Richter7.

-- distressed type is way too common and cliche.

-- we judged lots of gimmicky social media and non-traditional ideas, and they appealed to very small audiences; even with their pass-along numbers - judges called that failure. We wondered how they could justify the creative production expense just to get  "likes."

-- there were very few conceptual print ads -- many were just design decorating a tricky headline; the strong, simple concepts really stood head and shoulders above the others, and the we really appreciated them.

-- very poor work in trade and collateral categories.

-- the remaining print pieces, after finalists were pulled off the tables, we're simply slid into a big garbage can at the end of the long row of tables.  Ouch.

-- yes, there was a lot of corny humor in TV; subtle, well-acted, classy humor was rare.

-- the Coynes are very gracious hosts, and very nice people; they're struggling, like all other magazines, due to severely reduced subscriptions, and wondering how to monetize online readership.

-- CA's offices are very much industrial elegance -- renovated warehouse style with cement floors and lots of skylights; staff of about fifteen, plus two dogs.

-- Patrick very complimentary about R7 work; judges are selected by region and by having previous ads featured in CA, and by their recognizable, national work. Also, Jean Coyne likes to include a few women (on principle).

-- the judge from the Martin Agency (Steve Basset) is a very pleasant guy who's headed Geico's creative  for ten years; he prefers to live in Virginia because of the lifestyle; he hires mellow types who are easy to work with, he says--only wants to work with nice people.

--I discovered it's wisest to enter print work as hard copy because it is more carefully scrutinized by judges – and when shown digitally it washes out.

--Roger Baldacci from Arnold Worldwide indicated that writer and AD's are teamed together for radio, as well as for print and TV…as that seems to make better, more conceptual spots.

--one night at dinner, the judges all agreed that most of their young staff members (Millenials) all seem to have an attitude of entitlement, and therefore don’t work that hard. Also, they don’t know how to figure out problems on their own without constant direction.

--there was some very smart non-traditional work, but much of it seemed to be apps, or games (not true non-trad work). Some was very gimmicky, or only appealed to a very small audience…and, once again, didn’t justify the expense of production.

--Surprise, CA will begin to hand out trophies next year.

I'll report additional CA judging tidbits at the New.Bold. site.  Check it out.

What I Learned From a Really Bright Guy Named Rishad Tobaccowala

First of all, I hope I learned how to spell his name correctly.  He deserves that.

Rishad is Chief Strategy and Innovation Officer for Vivaki (part of Publicis Groupe), and he was the keynote speaker at the recent Advertising Marketing International Network (AMIN) conference.  A very, intelligent, mild-mannered, well-read man, indeed.  He gets up at 4 AM every day to study and learn from the Internet -- trends, blogs, news, product announcements, etc.  That's a dedication (and sleep schedule) I cannot match.

The first thing he said: The internet is not about technology -- it is about connection.  Get on and connect, and learn how others connect.

He also stated, "If an ad agency cannot deliver creativity, they should cease to exist."  Creativity is the currency is today's global economy.  Creativity is not copying.  Creativity is to surprise and enthrall.  Creativity is connecting the dots -- often in new ways that resonate with  people and culture.

The new creative palette is the social medium, the mobile medium and the API medium.  We're living in an increasingly data-infested world -- get used to it, he noted.  It leads to data-driven marketing.

He emphasized something we have long preached at Richter7:  People choose with their hearts and justify the decision with numbers.

He also emphasized "the only way to stay relevant is to change."  That's hard.  I like consistency.  Unless you yourself get better, your organization (marriage, family, club, company, church, etc.) cannot get better, he added.  To which I add a quotation that hangs on my office, and stares at me every day:  "Can we not appreciate that our very business is life is not to get ahead of others, but to get ahead of ourselves?  To break our own records, to outstrip our yesterdays by our todays, to give as we have never given, to do our work with more force and a finer finish than ever before -- this is the true idea: to get ahead of ourselves." (Thomas S. Monson)

What!? I'm judging the 2012 CA Ad Annual!?

For some reason I have yet to discover, the editors at Communications Arts magazine invited me to judge their prestigious Advertising Annual competition.  I'm trying to be cool about it, but I truly feel thrilled and honored.  The judging has now begun, and the first two categories -- radio and web banners -- were judged at my office.  In the case of radio, they sent a CD.  For web banners, they sent a series of links.  Here are a few nuggets of feedback:

1)  The radio category had only about 65 entries total.  Apparently a lot of people realize it will be tough to win and therefore pre-judge themselves out of competing.  I was rather surprised about that total.  I had been expecting closer to 200-300 radio entries. 

2)  Most radio entries did not take advantage of the "theater of the mind."  Sad fact.  Many were corny or "under-produced."  Most did not feature new concepts or approaches.  A few possessed genuine surprise and delight value.  There was a couple of nationally known radio campaigns that showed well.  And one not so well-known national advertiser  with a campaign that really slapped me in the face.  I played the campaign a handful of times because I enjoyed it so much.

3)  The web banner category is actually mis-titled in my opinion.  Any advertising that appears on the web goes into that category.  That made judging difficult because you would see a classic html banner, and then view a four-minute mini-movie with incredible production value.  Be forewarned -- if you are entering a banner in this category, it will be very difficult to win.  There were some page takeovers that were rather innovative, however, and competed, from a conceptual standpoint, with the big-budget pre-roll and YouTube videos.

4)  As with the radio campaign, there weren't an overwhelming number of entries -- probably about 75.

Obviously, I can't be any more specific than that.  And when I visit CA headquarters later this month to complete the judging, it should be very interesting to experience the process, and assess whether politics or favoritism plays a big role.  By the way, I'm not allowed to vote on our Richter7 work.  Understandable.  Still, I hope a number of other judges will see fit to give it an "in" vote.

A Lost Art?

Consider the last speech, college lecture, Sunday School lesson or family reunion you attended.  What do you remember of what was said – when you weren’t dozing?

If you remember anything at all, I’m betting it was a story.  No big surprise.  Stories are more entertaining, informative and memorable than facts, figures and philosophical diatribes.  Anybody that’s had any training in public speaking knows that.  Just ask any Toastmasters Club honcho.   Or, take a Dale Carnegie course. 

Stories rule.

In his book, What’s Your Point, Bob Boylan, author and consultant in the field of effective presentations, urges presenters to, “Tell stories.  They grab the audience.  You will be real when you tell your own stories.  They build on the feeling of ‘trust me.’  People love to hear stories, especially personal ones, and your familiarity with the story makes the words come more easily and believably.”

In advertising, I believe stories, well told, are critical to snagging and holding attention – whether we’re dealing with a YouTube video or a prime-time television spot.  They are imperative when developing and strengthening brand awareness and preference. 

The TV spot hailed as the best of the past century, Apple’s “1984,” told a riveting story, as do many of the most memorable Super Bowl spots over the years.  Remember the classic “Mean Joe Green” Coke spot from 1980? I still do, and I have a spotty memory.  Remember the pint-sized Darth Vader VW spot last year?

I believe the value of today’s highfalutin’ technology will be greatly minimized unless we learn how to apply the time-proven art of storytelling to it.  But it's not an easy task in this time-crunched, media-throttled society.  

That fact is reflected in this comment by James Clunie, a judge for the prestigious 2011 Communication Arts Advertising Annual. He is quoted in the Editor's Column of that issue as saying, "I'm always surprised at

how much time people expect you to engage with their brand.  I don’t have time up upload a picture of my face to a Web site so I can see what I look like sitting behind the wheel of a Jetta or on an American Standard toilet or whatever.”


Randal Rothenburg, president/CEO of the IAB (Interactive Advertising Bureau), noted in a recent AdvertisingAge article, “New technology does not change the human desire for sense-making narrative or the need for us to understand the world through tales well told.  But the technology does change how we learn stories, how we tell stories, and who hears them.We are concerned We are concerned industry is more concentrated on counting likes and click-throughs than forming deep relationship swith people, and that subsequently consumer interaction with brands is largely limited to likes, short comments, and critiques.  From this angle, interactive media is in its infancy."

 
That relates directly to my foundational belief that human beings are bid bundles of feelings, and that emotional impulses drive behavior, brand relationships and product loyalty.  

One thing is clear -- if you tell a story well, it will get passed on, and commented on via multiple technological tools (think Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.) at a speed and depth like never before.  And that's the best kind of advertising -- because it's free.

Stories engross.  Stories sell.  Technology is merely the messenger.