Advertising agencies are not the real problem
March 27th, 2007I like High Mcleod’s thoughts on marketing. He’s insightful and by all accounts walks the walk as well as talking the talk with regard to leading edge marketing. In his post “advertising 2.0 doesn’t exist” he has (among other things) a good crack at ad agencies, their relevancy and their role.
But is the problem really the ad agency? What is the client’s role in this? How close am I if I say that the majority of advertising and selling lacks impact because too little time and effort is invested into differentiating products, services and value proposition?
How much do companies invest in understanding their market? Their competitors? Trying to see what their customers see?
Is that the role of an ad agency? I don’t think so. Ad agencies in my mind are good at one thing and one thing only; take a brief and communicate an idea in the most effective way. No more, no less.
Here are a few of Hugh’s points:
5. Saatchi & Saatchi: “We’re not an ad agency, we’re an ideas business.” Right. Oh well, I’m sure they’re trying to get there one day. Maybe they’ll succeed. Who knows.
No they are not an ideas business; that’s what the client should be. The ad agency should just be good at ideas to communicate the idea.
6. So a lot of clients have been recently asking their ad agencies, “So what can you do for us in Web 2.0?” And the agencies have been replying, “Lots! Lots and lots and lots and lots!” Bullshit. Ad agencies have so far been hopeless in this space. I don’t know of ONE SINGLE piece of work coming out of a traditional ad agency in the last five years that has been even halfway original, thought provoking or effective. Captain Morgan’s? Beyond lame. Juicy Fruit? Beyond lame on steroids. Glenfiddich? A missed opportunity.
Ask a silly question and you get a silly answer. What’s web 2.0? A new magazine? Instead, what if a client asked “So what can you do for us to get our customers to tell us what they think?” That might be useful.
7. Bartle Bogle Hegarty, the very fine London ad agency, used to pitch their clients, “We makes brands famous”. Right. Like movie stars. Like celebs. Like the guys getting out of the limos and walking down the red carpet. Like the ones who get all the money and invites to the fancy parties. While the rest of us stand behind the velvet rope out in the cold, looking in with longing. Great. Super. Lucky us.
What’s wrong with that pitch? Nothing that I can see. The ad agency is pitching to a marketing manager/director/vp. The marketing manager wants a famous brand, because a famous brand will make her famous. All this demonstrates is that the agency knows their target market.
So ad agencies are not the problem. They’re just not as important in the mix as they believe they are. The problem lies with business that try and take short cuts.The problem lies with businesses that won’t invest time and money in the fundamentals of their marketing success.
March 27th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Good points… like David Ogilvy once said, “Clients get the advertising they deserve”….
March 28th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
PS. I don’t think the problem with agencies is what they do per se… the problem is how much they cost for the client.
March 28th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Hugh, thanks for your follow up. Look, i agree, but it is even more a matter of value than cost I think.
They will always struggle to return value if they don’t have the fundamentals right. In addition, many have been allowed to get away with blue murder because nobody had an idea what to expect as far as value is concerned, or how to measure it for that matter. Times are a changing…:)
Let me know when you if you ever come to Melbourne, Australia.
March 31st, 2007 at 2:19 am
I agree the Value:Cost ratio is in my experience part of the issue. Like you however I park a large % of responsibility for the problem back “clientside”. A buddy of mine works for the US division of a huge multinational. He explained to me about a year ago that his biggest problem was finding an agency to “outsource” strategy to. It reminded me of an article by Peter Matin in the FT some years ago which I copied and filed. Essentially it put the blame for the demise of railtrack down to their “outsourcing” of their core purpose ie maintaining the UK rail network. They devolved their reason for being to subcontractors and lost essential control. I think that Business strategy=marketing strategy=brand stragety. If you need to outsource this: resign. Don;t blame your agencies for the results of your confusion.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:46 am
Clive, thanks for the note. I agree, you can’t outsource strategy. You can get help to clarify your thinking, to get better information, to be challenged, to get new insights and perspectives, (which is a key part of what I do for a living), but you still need to own the strategy.
On business strategy = marketing strategy = brand strategy…difficult one. Unless you define “Marketing” and “Brand” here, people won’t really understand what you mean. They are both words that mean so many different things to different people.
I’ve done a few posts on the definition of marketing and the confusion that surrounds the concept. It’s the same with “Brand”. I think I do understand what you mean though.
April 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 am
David, you hit the nail on the head. I have been ranting about this on my blog, but the detail you present here is particularly relevant. For me at the end of the day an ad agency is a piece of the tactical puzzle. If the strategy is done well the creative brief will reflect that strategy and the ads that fall out of that are another part of the tactical execution.
April 3rd, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Thanks for your comment, Jennifer. So what is our role in this? Are people who sell the virtues of good strategy and (the need for investment in this) simply not compelling enough? To me, it seems a no-brainer, but maybe we are failing in getting this across in a compelling way.
Maybe we need a clearer ROI calculation attached to an investment in strategy.
April 4th, 2007 at 2:17 am
David, that is such a a great question… I actually wrote about it “Marketers get no respect” http://credibilitybranding.typepad.com/blog/2007/02/marketers_lamen.html I think we have to starting marketing strategic marketing?!?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:12 am
David, Still trying to answer the question that your answer 5. above poses: what do I mean by Marketing & by Brand. See http://positivechurn.blogspot.com/2007/04/brands-brands-brands.html and let me know what yo think.
Thanks
Clive