Fighting the "Keyhole View" of Advertising & Public Relations

When I "left advertising" last year, to "broaden my horizons and find new ways of communicating to the new world of consumers", most advertising folk I knew didn't have a clue as to what I was talking about.

Admittedly, even I wasn't sure what was out there, and what all I would have to learn (and unlearn), after being in the business of communication for 16 years!

The only thing I knew for sure, is that there is life beyond the 30 second TVC, the 100cc print ad, and the use of cricket instead of a real strategy.

I also knew that 'service industry' doesn't mean providing lip service, but means providing professionally thought out solutions the brand needs, not necessarily what the client personally wants.

In the 16 months since, I have quite literally gone back to school. Learning all about new consumers, new media, and new and exciting ways of communication.

I believe I have learn't a lot more 'new things' in the last 16 months, than I perhaps did in 16 years inside some of the largest agencies in the country!

Meanwhile my contemporaries in advertising, can at best describe my work as "doing his own thing" still not having a clue as to what I'm talking about.

• When I say I work with new media - the reaction is "oh, you make websites"


• When I say I am an independent consultant - they say "oh, you do freelance advertising"


• When I say I give clients a 360 degree perspective, it's "oh, you do below the line, DM and stuff??"

Well, I am "doing my own thing", which is actually a combination of all of the above, plus and a lot more! Minus of course, the late nights, messy meal times, working weekends, and minus pandering to the egos of amateur 'professionals' and clueless 'know-it-alls'.

The last two categories above of course, make up the bulk of the business today, and unfortunately drive the perception of advertising.

So what drove me up the wall? What drives senior people like me and even much higher ups to either put up their hands and walk away in disgust, or set out on their own to try and do things the way they believe it should be done?

I believe, there are four things the advertising industry in general needs to address/lacks:

1. Perception


2. Perspective


3. Planning


4. Processes

While these elements exist in clusters - among certain individuals, among certain agencies, and among certain clients - the numbers aren't enough, and don't have the critical mass to make a difference. At least, not yet.

PERCEPTION:

First and foremost, in order for our business to "grow up" and change the perceptions people have of us as 'overpaid, overhyped yarn spinners' we need to change our own perceptions about ourselves.

Yes, we have to stop reducing our importance by calling ourselves 'advertising professionals'. Or just 'PR professionals'. Because then we will be just that - a cog in the wheel of the overall marketing and communication machinery.

We need to see ourselves, and project ourselves, as overall strategic and communication professionals. And provide overall comprehensive solutions, which are unbiased by the kind of talent we have on our payroll, even if it means we have to find a third party to implement a program. (It's better to earn a referral fee, than earn a fee from something that isn't required in the first place).

I do believe advertising and public relations have to work together, not independently. It's apalling for me to think that most of the time the ad agency doesn't know what the PR firm is doing and vice versa for most shared clients. And you can forget them working together on a campaign!

The point is, when we can advise and recommend solutions to our clients, irrespective of whether we ourselves implement them or not, respect and trust for us will naturally grow.

PERSPECTIVE:

In order for the business to grow intellectually and effectively, rather than just financially, we definately need to broaden our perspectives.

We need to know more about the new age consumers, around new age media, and about the constantly emerging technologies that constantly change the aspirations, habits, and goal posts of both consumers and their media.

We need to have a perspective on these things today, as well as how it will and can evolve as soon as 3 months down the line, as well as a whole 2 years on.

Traditional SEC categorisation, TRP and Reach to my mind are just lame crutches of the intellectually challenged. And ass-covering excuses for mediocre performance.

We need to wake up to hits, eyeballs, word of mouth, peer to peer influencers, user generated media, and motivating factors beyond food, clothing and shelter.

We need to recognise that the internet, radio and peer to peer media are not "innovations" but a way of life today, and should be a part of every good communication program!

PLANNING:

It's amazing how unplanned our business it. Right from work flow within the office, to programs executed across audiences. Not surprisingly, we tend to be ad hoc and project demanded, rather than productivity driven.

With the right perspectives and perceptions (insights) we need to balance out current sales needs versus constant brand needs.

We need to plan, because quite simply as a studio manager used to tell us - if you fail to plan, you plan to fail.

This point is no rocket science, simply a reminder service :)

PROCESS:

This is usually the bane of every creative person, and account executive, and client. This is a "creative" business, isn't it? How can innovation be processed??

And how can we follow process when everything is needed yesterday?? Right?

Wrong! Because creativity and innovation are not something that will come fall in your lap. They are things that have to be pursued, nurtured and polished.

Creativity and Innovation are a science as well as an art.

And since there is no formal training, or text books for us in the business, each one of us comes with our own brand of thinking and way of working. Not surprisingly, we have the maximum issues around subjectivity, we keep the most bizarre working hours, and deadlines are like traffic lights on New Delhi roads - meant to be ignored.

Processes can help bring some order to our disorder, action instead of anarchy, and satisfaction of results instead of surrender to rubbish.

Process makes life easier - for those who know their jobs, and especially for those who don't. Don't fight process, harness it.

Processes also weed out the weeds in our fields of talent. A VP I once worked it, was a great proponent of 'chaos theory'. Only this was his cover for not knowing his job, not doing any work, and his inability to define roles and responsibilities. Chaos helped him pit people against people, and hence keep anyone from noticing that he was all crap!

So beware of those who fight process!

TO SUM UP:

If we as an industry don't want to be seen as 'narrow minded' and with "keyhole vision", we need to unlock our minds and open our doors to change.

We need to get out of our independent silos of advertising and public relations and discover how to blend the power of the two - where paid communication and unpaid-for hype work together.

We need to constantly and consistently find whatever it takes to give our clients greater impact. In whichever medium we think relevant. Targetting whoever we think is important, including those within client's organisations!

We need to aspire to a stage where we're not depreciated as a commoditised service provider, but instead appreciated as a specialist solutions partners.

Is that so hard to see?

Santosh Desai, Advertising, and The Way We Are!

A couple of days back I read that Santosh Desai was leaving hardcore advertising. Not surprising I thought, for a man of his thinking and abilities, he probably felt stifled at McCann. And he probably would have felt the same in any other agency.

Then this morning I read an interview with him in AgencyFaqs, where he vented his frustrations on what he called the "narrow and one-track mindedness" of the industry he's spent 20 years in (a large part of it, where he was the boss!)

Not surprisingly, the interview was flooded with comments in the last 10 hours (16 comments until the writing of this post). While most commentors praised his insights and commended his decision, not surprisingly some of them accused/asked Santosh what he did to change things?

While it's a valid question (and something we all should ask ourselves, when we complain)... but I was apalled by the gall of anyone to suggest that Santosh did nothing to change the business!

Not to discredit the others at McCann India, but the stature which the agency has today, hasn't just fallen out of the skies with some divine intervention... nor can you say any one person alone (as some would say perhaps Prasoon Joshi) changed the face of the agency.

Before the arrival of these two gentlemen, McCann's creativity and strategy was at best mediocre (For example, remember the atrocious work done for Coke in the early days before the Santosh-Prasoon team up?)

Then there's Account Planning. I cannot thing of too many people who brought so much respect to the function as Santosh did. He even made Creative Directors in other agencies look at their planners in new light. And even got a lot of them to consider making planners their 'equal partners' in creativity!

I think we need to give Santosh a lot more credit than he's being given.

At the same time, what gives anyone the idea, that he's done here? And that he won't make a difference to the business as "a client" - from the 'outside' that is.

Most of us won't admit it, but most agencies are completely driven by their clients' thinking. Their resistance to learn and try new things comes not from their own lack of interest, but rather what they think the client believes and would resist! As wierd and uncomfortable as it may sound, this is the reality. The more experimentative our clients, the more experimentative are their agencies.

And finally, if we simply absorb Santosh's comments with the right spirit, we may actually be able to do something positive about it. With or without our clients' help!

Note: I would like to acknowledge that we're not as bad as it may sound. There are still a whole bunch of people around here, with the balls to fight and make a difference - the folks at Ogilvy, for example... and A Advertising, The Shop, to name just a few. And a whole lot of unheard of others who are doing new and interesting things, inside and outside of their agencies.

Advertising, PR, and the art of saying "No"

The phrases "No, can't do!" or "thanks, but no thanks!" don't quite figure in the vocabulary of advertising, marketing and public relations people, do they? And I mean when it is in the context of standing up for what we believe in, or refusing business because it goes against our values, professional instincts, and the interests of our people.

Well that's the power of money, and the sad-but-true belief that "if i don't do it their way, someone else will".

I am perhaps the most flexible of professionals when it comes to listening to the other point of view (more now, as an independent). But I am also a strong believer in saying "no, can't do" (and have done so, again more as an independent).

The point is however, saying "no" for the right reasons:

• If you're culturally mismatched or professional work styles differ, it is the obvious thing to say no.


• If the client has a history of "bad relationships" say no, there's no way you're going to change that.


• If there is no mutual professional trust and respect, say no. Note, personal trust and respect has nothing to do with the professional side - he/she may make you feel good at an individual level, but professionally you and your teams will suffer.


• If anyone treats your people badly (being rude, unfair, aggressive, etc) stand up for your people. And don't work with companies who think people are transitory and meant to be used (typical lousy statement: hey, if they can't handle it, they shouldn't be in the service industry!)


• If you cannot take on something, due to lack of resources/time/whatever, say no and state the reason honestly (leave a window open). Don't say yes, because then everyone will suffer.

I am sure everyone has good reasons to say "no", and "thanks, but no thanks!"

But it's not just about saying "no", you have to be sensitive about it, and do it right:

• Lay out the groundrules in the very beginning of a relationship. Outline your expectations and belief systems from the beginning. Understand the other side as well.


• If you see a crisis coming, or know you're going to say no, give the client a 'heads up' as soon as possible, so they can make alternate arrangements. It would be worse, if you leave them in the lurch.


• Say it to the point person in the client's side, not down the line and expect them to carry the word upwards. Say it one-on-one, with dignity.


• Don't go public with messy stories or gory details. State differences of values if you have to in press and the public at large. Take your people into confidence, make them feel proud of what you've done, but discourage them from tom-tomming the act in public.


• Don't do it at the drop of a hat, do it after great consideration and talking to your people to know how much is too much. Let your people decide how much they will take, before they risk being broke!

And to the above, I personally work with the target that my biggest client should never exceed 30% of all my business. If it does, I am in deep shit! The point is then to build other businesses, to ensure I'm never being used, or live in the fear of having all my eggs in one basket!

And that, is the greatest support you will have, if you ever want to say "no" ...yes??

What Women Want (And Men Don't)

In the 2000 classic "What Women Want" starring Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt - Mel, a hotshot (but arrogant MCP) creative director comes out with brilliant advertising campaigns targeted at women because he develops the ability to read women's thoughts, and hence know "what women want!"

But when you're not Mel - and you often cannot read women's words (leave alone thoughts) how to you communicate and connect with them as a marketer and communication professional?

Well Dr Luan Brizendine offers some insights in her recently published book "The Female Mind". She conclusively (and scientifically) states that women talk more than men - an average of 20,000 words a day, against just 7,000 words spoken by men.

She also says the inherent genetic difference between men and women's brains makes women more talkative. And women love to hear their own voices - they get a buzz out of it, and devote more brain-power to chit-chat.

Don't get me wrong, I love to hear women chit-chat. It's fascinating. And as a communicator, and lover of long-copy I find women beautiful audiences to communicate with.

Men on the other hand are less patient and more action driven. Quit the talk and show me the money (or honey in many cases!)

So as a communicator in the new world and new media, what would I do?

• Create more interactive plans when talking to women. Use great layouts with happy and soft imagery that's inviting and involving. Use chats, q & a, discussion forums, and explain all the tech stuff easily, patiently and respectfully.


• Provide racier, more visually stimulating and action oriented programmes for men. Galleries, games, perspectives, and just lay out lots of techy stuff for men and wait for them to figure out and feel good about it.


• Use more audio and text based communication tools for women online - podcasts, long explanatory and involving text.


• For men, use videos, flashy imagery and interactive tools.


• Expect that women will get involved for longer durations and will be more loyal to your programs (will stick to you through think and some thin).


• Be prepared that men will be in and out, and remain flirtatious in nature, and need greater "what's in it for me" (men are like that only)


• Of course, treat both with equal respect and don't treat either like an idiot.

And if you want to learn how to hold the attention of your male and female audiences in any medium, and keep them loyal for life, follow the paths of the two great masters - Jay Leno and Oprah Winfrey.

Yes, Jay with his slam-bam-shooting-from-the-hip one liner style is brilliant with men!!!

Oprah with her soft-earnest-we-are-with-you style brings out the women loyalists like no other :)
.

Wal-Mart, Julie Roehm, Draft-FCB - the highs and lows straightened out

I (like a whole lot of us) have been following the abovementioned story from the time Draft-FCB got the Wal-Mart business... when George Parker exposed the internal memo at Ogilvy... then when Draft-FCB 'released the lions'... right up to the discovery a couple of days back that Wal-Mart fired Julie Roehm and has put the business up for a pitch again!

Well, between comments and opinions from George Parker and (in George's words) a whole lot of other 'wankers' the story rivals any Sidney Sheldon plot, or for those familiar with India it resembles bollywood masala, minus the singing and dancing around the trees (though in this plot we do have certain cats doing it in the bushes!).

But if you're finding it tough (as I did) to figure out the real meat of the story minus the masala - then Bob Garfield is the one to bare it all for you - including the whos, whens, and insights on the whys.

As a communication professional, this plot offers plenty of learning (besides what Bob explains):

• Business partnerships aren't any good, if you're mismatched culturally.
• Don't hire people just because they did (or are supposed to have done) a great work elsewhere. Question if they can deliver similar results, and not just deliver similar campaigns for you.
• And finally, as we all know - winning an account is usually easiest part of our business - keeping it and keeping it happy is the toughest part!

Read the Bob Garfield perspective here. And the George Parker perspective here.

.

Random Useful Thought # 002

Being a client to an advertising agency or public relations firm automatically authorises you to make changes in the campaigns they present. But it doesn't automatically qualify you to be right!

e-serve advertising: faking it big time!

When I first saw the new television commercial for e-serve Citigroup Global Services being aired in India, I thought I'd missed something - because no one could have actually made make such a crappy ad!

Then suddenly I saw it again, and again! Realisation dawned: I wasn't missing anything, but the ad was missing everything - logic, intelligence, credibility and class!

The commercial features a guy walking up to the camera and saying "e-serve is now citigroup global services and everyone's excited. Don't believe me, listen..." and then he goes on to sing and clap the same line to a bunch of toddlers, who (being innocent gullible toddlers) get caught up with the excitement of the clapping and start clapping themselves... "see! everyone's excited" he ends with a smugly pompous look on his face.

Yeh. That's one ad. Another has the guy mouth the same line and then hold up the mike below a screaming-with-excitement-bungee-jumper. "see, everyone's excited" he says again.

Obviously the company's trying very hard to convince people that e-serve becoming citigroup global services is a good thing. But couldn't get anyone to be really excited, even for their ads! Leading to this big-time faking-it script.

It's not just me - last week's Economic Times Brand Equity panel has also panned the ad as "Bekaar" (lousy). And I quote "Looks like someone at the agency took the client brief of drumming up excitement very literally. But if you need to be told by some guy on TV that 'everyone is excited' it doesn't speak much for the excitement. Or for Citigroup, for that matter."

Hello! What were you thinking??!

.

Hi, I'm Vendor No. XYZ-123

"I spend many hours a day counselling your CEO, my company just designed a programme that is expected to avert a crisis in your lives, and change the fortunes of your company. But hey, I'm just a vendor and supplier, like your plumber, travel agent, and your friendly neighbourhood newspaper boy!"

It's amazing how in this day and age, marketing consultants, advertising agencies and public relations firms get clubbed under the head of "vendors and suppliers" by the clients we work with - for their accounts and other financial purposes.

We all strut around claiming to be partners in the success of our client's business, yet few of us take affront to this misnomer, or expect changes in this area.

Not surprisingly, we're treated as such, especially by the finance and accounts departments! During the last 17 years in the business, I have only heard of such shabby treatment. But in the last 17 months as an independent, I have experienced this first hand.

Clients expect work and results overnight, but take their own sweet time in making payments - often leaving you at the mercy of accountants, to whom you are just another vendor! Junior people down the line in Client organisations have no respect for experience or levels on the other side - because quite simply they're paying and you're vending!

While this is sad but expected, what's worse is how we in the business ourselves often treat the people we work with. I once received an email from the finance head of a PR firm, and the mail neither had the courtesy of a hello or anything, and as I said earlier was addressed to everyone including the guy who books their plane tickets, their telephone service provider, and of course me and their other communication "vendors"!

The text of the whole mail:

"Per our corporate parent ***, ******* is required to notify our suppliers of ***'s code of business conduct and corporate social responsibility policy as it relates to the sale of goods and/or services sold to us. The complete details of this policy can be found at the following website: (url here)
Please take note of the policies stated therein."

That's it!!! That was the whole mail! Well if a PR firm interacts with its "suppliers" this way (perhaps unwittingly), how do you expect clients to be any better!?

Think about it. Do something about it!

Note: Not all clients are like this. I have experienced/heard of great respect being given to our fraternity by companies like Whirlpool, Reckitt-Benckiser, Pepsi, ITC, IBM, Microsoft, and Tata Motors. I imagine there are more. And may their tribe increase!
.

KFC Advertises to Aliens!

It took me a while to figure out if this is a joke or its serious - a KFC image of Colonel Sanders, allegedly visible from the moon! I still don't know. Check it out here at Innocent Bystanders. I especially love the comments!

Oh... now I know why this blog is so interesting. The authors claim that they're not bloggers, but commenters! Nice tagline - "anyone can blog... commenting is hard" (hmm... that explains the few comments on my blog!).

Worth checking out... and they're not paying me to say all this!

Footnote Added: I just noticed the original news report is from Reuters, here.
.

David-Bates-Enterprise: Menage a trois or trouble?

I just received an sms alert from my friendly industry spammer, about a David-Bates-Enterprise merger. Yes, David, Bates, Enterprise... I've double checked the article it pointed to, and you can see for yourself.

For those of you who don't have the context of Indian advertising agencies - this is the wierdest merger anyone of us here can imagine! Because the three entities seem to have nothing in common!

The first union which took place a while back was a typical Indian arranged marriage - where some elders in their wisdom decided to get two very different people married, saying "we know what's best for you. Once you're married, you'll sort out your differences, make adjustments and create a good family. Love? What's love got to do with it? Once you're married, you'll learn to love each other in good time!"

So the two agencies - Bates and Enterprise - one a middle-class-generally-boring-boy of no particular lineage, married the hot-and-popular-westernised-babe from Mumbai.

Being a typical Indian marriage, the boy was put in charge, and the girl was expected to "adjust" and live up the the "new family name" of Bates Enterprise!

Not surprisingly, they had their internal issues (read ego problems) of adjustment, culture, priorities... the works! ...but like most Indian couples they are still living together!

Now along comes this dude David. Yes, david is another dude! Cool, clever, Fun, everything the middle-class boy (and now marriage) is not! David's been independent, standing up against the big boys in all areas (David vs Goliath in real advertising life!)

As a saving grace, his name seems to be the first in the title. The question is, will David's belief systems also get priority in the way they live? Will he get to call the shots, or will he have to quit being enterprising and step back with abated energy?!

I have nothing against each of the individual agencies - in fact I hold the leaders at the helm of each entitiy in high regard:

Mohammed Khan, in my mind is the guru of classy and cool advertising in India;
Subhash Kamath, a great servicing guy and leader to have for your team;
Josy Paul, the unassuming yet brilliant creative guy of contemporary Indian cool.

Each has the substance of a classic advertising person, as against the maverick flash-in-the-pans of today. But each is a name to reckon with, and a leader in his own right. Each has a following, and has nurtured a culture that is distinct from any other (and each other).

The basic question is, will this menage a trois of clashing cultures result in a fantastic threesome, or simply end up to be a menage a trouble?

I wouldn't bet any money on it. But with due regard for the three gentlemen mentioned above, I'd put a little money into a temple and pray for them.

God help you guys! My best wishes are with you.

.