m&k David Roland, Mirco Hecker, Tiktok is becoming increasingly important as an advertising platform - at the same time, there seem to be some companies, but also agencies, that are still cautious about Tiktok advertising. Why is that?

David Roland: Tiktok is first and foremost an entertainment platform, but many people still mistakenly regard it as a social medium. We focus on the content and not the individual network. This means that every video can go viral, regardless of the number of followers. This means that even company presences with few subscribers have the opportunity to be discovered and seen. The more original and, above all, native (i.e. platform-appropriate) the content, the more likely it is to be met with enthusiasm within the community - regardless of whether it is promotional or not. The platform's potential lies precisely in its authenticity and interaction. 77% of Tiktok users think it's good when brands join in with trends or come up with original approaches that involve others - keyword: participation.

"Our focus is on content and not the individual network."

 

Can you give us a very simple overview of which forms of advertising your platform offers - and which are currently among the favorites?

Mirco Hecker: The familiar formats include in-feed ads, Top View and Spark Ads - which many have probably already noticed while scrolling. We also offer branded mission campaigns with creators to ensure even more relevance and authenticity in specific communities - because: Creators know their community and know what is relevant and works. There are also contextual ads, for example in the premium publisher area around content from Sky, DAZN or Joko and Klaas. We have also developed special solutions such as ads in the Tiktok search, commerce features and integrations with e-commerce software. Event organizers and artists also benefit from our partnerships with Eventim and Eventbrite, which make it easy to advertise tickets and make them directly available.

 

Keyword content creators: Does the collaboration with established Tiktok accounts generate a particularly strong impact?

DR: We see signs of this with creators and accounts of all sizes, not just the established ones. We have found that content that is specifically tailored to Tiktok also increases brand recall. This effect can be amplified by working with creators. By integrating them, the recall potential of native content increases by a further 27 percent. Creators are therefore invaluable when it comes to boosting engagement.

 

What is the best thing to do as a company if I want to "test" whether Tiktok advertising is worthwhile for me with a limited budget?

MH: The simplest test is certainly to create four to five videos and post them organically on your own account. After a short time, you will notice which video the algorithm "hits", i.e. which video is viewed particularly frequently or for a long time by users. You can then allocate a media budget to this video in order to achieve your marketing goals - the infamous KPIs. However, we recommend that Tiktok is allocated a share within the media mix that is comparable to other platforms, even in initial tests. It makes no sense to "test Tiktok for ten thousand francs" for a 2 million franc campaign.

"At Tiktok, we believe that attitude is more important than age."

 

We observe SMEs that - although they are actually active in the B2B sector - generate hundreds of thousands of Tiktok followers. And we observe large international companies whose accounts are simply not growing; whose content is not "working". There is probably no magic formula, but what are some companies doing "right" and others "wrong"?

DR: As a company, you can be successful on Tiktok with or without an agency. The advantage of an agency can be that you have direct access to existing expertise, which many agencies now have, without any lead time. We also work with a large agency team to specifically train and advise creative, social and media agencies. If the marketing expertise for digital channels is also generally available in-house or - as is the case for an increasing number of customers - Tiktok is becoming a strategic channel, it makes perfect sense to build up our own resources. Our local teams of experts support corporate clients and agencies across industries in using Tiktok professionally.

 

Change of perspective: Let's assume that agencies create a mix of advertising channels for media clients. How does Tiktok fit into this mix? Does it replace other social media platforms or does it work best as a complement?

From the first contact to the sale, we now serve the entire funnel. However, media experts know that every channel contributes to the advertising impact. Without any budget restrictions, the channel question would usually not arise. So the question is: What is the additional benefit of a channel and how does it interact with other channels? Tiktok does not replace any channels, but contributes its part to the advertising impact and, frankly, to an ever-increasing extent.

MH: Thanks to the work of Les Binet and Peter Field in the UK, for example, we know that TV advertising together with OOH advertising is a highly effective channel combination. However, TV can only be effective with those who still watch TV. These are very few among the target groups of under 35-year-olds, who are particularly strongly represented on Tiktok. Because we are aware of our brand-building effect compared to TV, we have therefore been offering the option of running Tiktok campaigns in digital OOH for some time now, giving our customers additional contact points with our users outside of the app.

 

Good keyword: How elaborate is the target group targeting? And does Tiktok primarily reach young people or is the field of users de facto much broader?

Tiktok is no longer just a channel for young people: In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, almost one in four people use the platform. To get a feel for it: We have exciting young creators, such as the feminist "@vikykid", but also, for example, the over 80-year-old "@erikarischko" with her fitness videos. In terms of content and also in terms of creators and users, we are becoming more and more mature and diverse. We now cover almost all age groups. For us, the characteristics of the people on the platform cannot be limited to the number of years of life anyway. The people who use Tiktok belong to a new generation - "Generation T", which is independent of age. At Tiktok, we believe that attitude is more important than age.

---

An overview of the most common ad formats at Tiktok

• In-Feed Ads: This vertical video display with sound can be enhanced with interactive add-ons to increase engagement.
• Top View: Effective in-feed ads that users see first when they open the app.
• Branded Mission: Allows crowdsourcing with creators to work on authentic content for brands, promote the most successful videos as ads and drive more engagement.
• Branded Effects: Allows you to create a customized and globally available effect with advertising tools.
• Spark Ads: Spark Ads are a native ad format that allows organic Tiktok posts and their features to be used for advertising.
• Pulse (Premiere): Pulse is a contextual advertising solution that integrates brands' content alongside the most popular four percent of videos. Last year, the Pulse portfolio was expanded: Pulse Premiere offers brands the opportunity to place their ads directly next to the content of premium publishers in the "For you" feed.
• Search Ads Toggle: This feature in Tiktok Ads Manager allows brands to place existing in-feed ads in Tiktok search results. This places ads next to the organic search results of relevant search queries.

---

Mirco Hecker has been working for Tiktok since 2021, first as Head of the Media Agency Team in DACH and since 2023 as Brand Partnerships Lead for Switzerland. He was previously Managing Director of the Association of German Advertising Agencies (GWA).

David Roland has been working for Tiktok in Germany since June 2020. As Group Vertical Director for Consumer Services, he is responsible for client relationships in various industries, such as automotive, travel, insurance and banking, lifestyle, telecommunications and technology, as well as the overall business in Switzerland. Since July 2024, his responsibilities have also included managing the agency business for the DACH region.

Creativity and value-adding thinking in organizations are gaining importance due to increasing interconnectedness, the formation of communities, and interdisciplinary communities of expertise. In a world that is becoming increasingly complex and dynamic, it is crucial to view creative processes not as isolated phenomena, but as the result of collective efforts within communities. This development requires a new understanding of leadership, resilience, and communication. Only in this way can we fully ensure that creative potential is realized in the future. At the heart of this change is the individual, whose needs and abilities form the foundation for innovative and sustainable creativity.

Communities in the Creative Future

For a long time, creativity was the domain of the lone wolf—the reclusive artist, the brilliant inventor. But in today’s highly interconnected world, it is becoming clear that creative excellence is increasingly the result of collective processes and communities. Communities thus play a central role by providing and utilizing platforms for the exchange of ideas, knowledge, and resources. Such communities can be both physical and digital in nature and bring together people from different cultures, disciplines, age groups, and ethnicities. The great advantage of creative communities lies in the diversity of their members: this diversity not only fosters the emergence of new ideas and innovations but also their further development. When people from different backgrounds come together, a creative dynamic emerges that fosters innovation. Furthermore, communities provide a supportive environment where ideas can be safely tested, questioned, and refined without fear of negative consequences.

«The future of creativity is on the verge of a profound transformation.»

In these communities, the individual plays a particularly important role. Each person contributes their own experiences, skills, and perspectives. It is therefore of great importance to create structures that foster individual creativity while also harnessing the benefits of collective collaboration.

Analysis of Creativity in Organizations

Our new study, «Welcome to the C-Suite, Creativity,» is dedicated to the systematic analysis of the role of creativity in organizations. It helps us understand the importance of creativity for companies and gain insights into how this resource—which can be activated—can be strategically and operationally leveraged. Our research subject is therefore more than just an individual skill; it is amplified through the interaction of individuals within teams and can significantly influence a company’s strategic direction. Our study explores how creativity emerges in teams and what significance it holds for organizational strategy. To uncover the hidden sources of innovative ideas, we take a critical look at the fundamental prerequisites for unlocking the potential of creative thinking.

Focus on Individuals

In a creative organizational future shaped by communities, the individual remains at the heart of every creative endeavor. Creativity is a deeply personal creative process that draws on a person’s individual experiences, values, and emotions. It is essential to address individual needs, recognize uniqueness, and foster it. This can be achieved through personalized learning and work environments that cater to individual preferences and strengths. In creative communities, this can be achieved by providing mentoring programs, individual development plans, and flexible work models (both in terms of infrastructure and geography). The goal is for every individual to flourish within the community and realize their full creative potential.

Resilience as a Foundation

Creativity is not only a process of creation, but also a way of dealing with challenges, setbacks, and uncertainties. Today’s business environment is characterized by rapid change and growing complexity. In this context, resilience is a key trait of creative individuals and communities. It also means working in a solution-oriented manner despite adverse circumstances and developing innovative, unconventional approaches. In creative communities, resilience can be fostered through a culture of trust and support. When members of a community know they can count on the support of others during difficult times, they are more willing to take risks and develop new ideas. Sharing failures and learning together also contribute to building resilience. Communities that encourage open and honest dialogue about challenges and mistakes create an environment where creativity can flourish over the long term.

Leadership in Creative Communities

Leadership plays a crucial role in creative organizations. Traditional leadership models based on hierarchy and control are ill-suited to managing the complexity, speed, and dynamics of creative processes. Instead, leadership in creative communities requires a new understanding of the leadership role, one based on collaboration, empowerment, and empathy.

A creative leader of a community is able to convey a vision and inspire the community’s members to work together toward that vision. This is less about giving instructions and more about creating the right conditions and motivating people. Other key elements include defining clear yet flexible target ranges, fostering a supportive and inclusive environment, and providing resources.

«Creativity is one of the most beautiful human qualities—the dance of our minds, in which we create new patterns and structures of thought that can then give rise to ideas, novel solutions, and motivation for entire teams.» – Prof. Dr. Miriam Meckel, Co-Founder & Executive Chairwoman @ Ada

Leaders are expected to possess a high degree of emotional intelligence and the ability to communicate with empathy. Only in this way can the organization’s creative potential be unleashed and maximized.

Communication as the Key

In a networked work ecosystem, communication among stakeholders is the key to success. Targeted communication makes it possible to exchange ideas, avoid misunderstandings, and develop a shared vision. In creative communities, communication plays a central role in integrating the diverse perspectives and experiences of members to arrive at innovative solutions. It is important to foster a culture of open and honest communication. This means that all members of a community must feel that their opinions and ideas are heard, respected, and valued. However, such a culture of communication also requires courage: the courage to share unconventional solutions, the courage to accept feedback, and the courage to admit mistakes and learn from them. In creative communities, which often consist of people with diverse backgrounds and experiences, intercultural communication is also important. Different cultural influences lead to different communication styles. This can result in misunderstandings and conflicts. It is therefore crucial to educate all members of the community about intercultural diversity and to foster and strengthen their ability to understand and interpret cultural differences.

The large number is 60

The future of organizational growth and development lies in unlocking creative potential—that is, the ability to combine individual strengths with collective resources. Creative communities offer the opportunity to harness the diversity of human experiences and skills to develop innovative solutions that address the complex challenges facing the organization. At the same time, the individual must be at the center of creative processes in order to draw on personal experiences and perspectives to spark the initial impetus for solutions.

Resilience, leadership, and communication are key elements that determine the success of creative communities. Resilience makes it possible to sustain creative processes even in difficult times; leadership ensures that the right conditions for creativity are established; and communication ensures that ideas and visions are effectively shared.

Those who internalize these insights and observations, critically examine the status quo of their own organization, allow room for the development of this ability within the highest governing body, and declare it a valuable asset can be up to 60 percent more successful. The study found that creative companies perform about 60 percent better than their less creative competitors. If that isn’t an incentive: Welcome to the C-Suite, Creativity!

---

The Study: «Welcome to the C-Suite, Creativity» examines the role creativity plays in organizations and how it can be used to address today’s challenges. To this end, the initiators André Paetzel and Christoph Pietsch not only mobilized their «Creative Hive» network (and encouraged people such as Duncan Wardle, Frank Dopheide, and Dr. Miriam Meckel to participate), but also collaborated with the Kienbaum Institute, Innofact, Human Unlimited, Metadesign, and the Publicis Groupe. «Welcome to the C-Suite, Creativity» is available online for free.

m&k: Andrew Robertson, before we began our conversation, you explained in a humorous talk that we’re seeing less and less humorous advertising. What’s the reason for that—and why do you think it’s important to reverse this trend?

Andrew Robertson: Advertising works when it appeals to people on an emotional level. This is worth emphasizing because all too often we take a different approach—we appeal to logic, assuming that people methodically weigh their options before every decision and reach a conclusion based on that. But that’s not true. It usually starts with intuition—that gut feeling. Let me give you an example: When someone buys a new car and has a choice between several vehicles, he or she will usually choose the car that intuitively appeals to them the most—and later use facts and figures to rationalize the choice. We start with an impression, then we back it up with facts. Advertising should therefore not focus on reason or calculation—but rather target emotions: that moment of falling in love at first sight; that spontaneous laugh. If a brand can use advertising to trigger the release of dopamine or oxytocin in potential customers, it will automatically be associated with positive emotions—emotions that people want to experience again and again—and that keep them coming back to the brand. Imagine you’re standing in the supermarket in front of a shelf with a hundred different chocolate bars… how likely is it that you’ll buy the one you associate with positive moments from your childhood?!

 

Very likely.

Exactly. Of course, not all of us are in the chocolate business (laughs), but … that illustrates pretty well what I mean.

«Humor is incredibly powerful—it's medicine when we're feeling down.»

 

In short: We can't help but like brands that make us laugh.

Exactly. Humor is incredibly powerful—it’s medicine when we’re feeling down; it offers a welcome break from the monotony of everyday life. Yet fewer and fewer «funny ads» are being produced—especially since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. We’ve lost sight of humor and haven’t… brought it back into focus. Perhaps because our present is marked by so many crises that some people worry jokes might be inappropriate? That said, I’d counter right away: The term «gallows humor» didn’t come about for no reason. If we can’t influence external circumstances anyway, it certainly doesn’t hurt to laugh at least once in a while.

 

Is the «decline of humor» in advertising part of a larger trend—namely, that we’re seeing less and less creative excellence and more and more KPI fetishism?

I would be neither a good chairman for a company nor a good speaker if I were to fundamentally reject numbers—that is, KPIs. As you were there, you heard me base my earlier remarks on surveys that prove just how positively consumers respond to humor in advertising. If I didn’t have those numbers, I wouldn’t have needed to pick up the microphone at all. Simply claiming, «Funny is good, trust me on this!» … won’t get anyone out of their shell. And you certainly won’t win any pitches that way.

«Advertising works when it speaks to people on an emotional level.»

 

So humor, creativity, and «courage» alone aren’t enough?

Ah, this idea of wanting to be bold … «being bold,» as they say in English … it’s fascinating, and it’s constantly touted as a guiding principle for agencies. But it strikes me as a bit hollow if we don’t back it up with evidence. We have to show that it’s worth it to be entertaining and unconventional. Incidentally, I learned that, among other things, from a banker.

 

Of all things?

Yes! (laughs) Let me tell you the story behind it. Thirteen years ago, we ran a fantastic campaign for the National Bank in Australia. The campaign won the Grand Prix at Cannes because it was so effective—an absolute «home run.» The basic idea was this: Back then, many consumers in Australia believed that the country’s four major banks were in cahoots, colluding with one another. That was a problem. The National Bank—as one of those four banks—had introduced new financial products and worked hard on its customer experience… but it wasn’t getting through to people because they distrusted the alleged financial cartel.

«The idea of wanting to be brave is fascinating (…), but it strikes me as somewhat hollow if we don't back it up with evidence.»

 

How did you address this mistrust?

We launched a communication campaign under the slogan «Break up.» The central idea was that the National Bank would publicly «break up» with the other banks just in time for Valentine’s Day. Imagine newspaper ads with the slogan «It’s over between us» … or with typical breakup phrases that we gave a slight twist: «It’s not us. It’s you.» People loved it, and the bank saw a significant increase in new business.

 

So what does this have to do with courage—and evidence?

About a year after the campaign launched, I was in Australia and wanted to personally thank the CEO of the National Bank for his courage in approving this kind of advertising. I did just that, and he looked at me completely bewildered: «Courage? Are you out of your mind?» (laughs) That left me confused, so I asked him to explain what he meant. «Listen, Mr. Robertson,» he said, «I’m paid to manage risks. When your people came here twelve months ago and told me about their plans, I was thoroughly amused—but at the same time, I also carefully considered the risks we’d be exposing ourselves to if we consistently followed the proposed path. The risks seemed manageable to me: People might shake their heads at us, but we wouldn’t lose any corporate clients—or individual clients, for that matter. So… what was wrong with your idea?» There’s a lot of wisdom in this anecdote—that’s why I like to share it so often. Our industry often calls for clients to finally show some courage again—but without demonstrating to them how this would positively impact their annual results, brand perception, and reputation. Sure, if we want to be 100 percent sure that nothing goes wrong, we can produce safe, run-of-the-mill work—but wouldn’t it be wiser to say: «Huge potential for success, manageable risk… then let’s do it!» Being «bold» doesn’t mean acting foolishly or recklessly—it means accepting a calculated risk in exchange for a realistic chance to break out of the mold.

«Whether a thought comes from the headquarters in New York City or a small branch office of the agency in Asia—all ideas must be taken seriously.»

 

I can already see the line of reasoning that agencies—and CMOs—will draw from this interview.

I’d like to offer a snappy slogan to go with that: «Want to be bold? Think like a banker.» Let me say it again: We can’t expect a company’s chief financial officer to jump at the statement, «This is so great, this is so creative—you simply have to support it right now!» The statement: «If we do X, then we have a chance at Y. The worst that can happen is Z.» … that’s much more likely to resonate.

 

Is this...Do you think this approach is the reason for the success that BBDO Worldwide has enjoyed under your leadership over the past two decades?

Absolutely, but of course there are other factors as well: Who works with us is absolutely crucial. Our goal has always been—and still is—to attract a disproportionately high share of the limited resource of exceptional «talent» to BBDO. The better we are at recruiting, the higher the collective bar rises, because such people motivate one another. And that increases the likelihood that we’ll produce outstanding work. I like to compare a great idea to a glass of water that you’re carrying across the dance floor at a club: If a lot of people bump into you, the glass gets emptier, and the idea gets significantly weaker. However, if many people not only… make room for you, but are also mindful—and respectful—because they know how important that metaphorical glass is, then the idea arrives intact. And then, sometimes, it turns out really, really well.

«It would be wiser to say: »Huge potential for success, manageable risk... so let's do it!'"

How important are clients to an agency's success?

Oh, they’re among the most important! You have to earn their trust—convince them that, as an agency, you’re worth their time, resources, and a certain amount of risk. If this leads to a partnership on equal footing, we’ll keep getting closer and closer to the «sweet spot.» And one more thing: No idea should be dismissed!

 

What does that mean …?

Whether a thought comes from the headquarters in New York City or a small branch office of the agency in Asia—all ideas must be taken seriously and evaluated according to the same criteria. Elitism has absolutely no place here; after all, you can never predict who—or where—will ultimately come up with the brilliant idea. We’ve been named «Agency of the Year» several times in Cannes over the past few years; you can only achieve something like that with total commitment—to your teams, to your clients, and to your ideas. Everything has to work together seamlessly.

 

Christian Rätsch, the CEO of Team BBDO in Germany, likes to talk about «new closeness» in the context of the restructuring he carried out for his group of companies at the beginning of the year. That fits well with what you just said, doesn’t it?

Yes. We need to present complex processes to our customers in a simpler way—the world is complicated enough as it is; as service providers, we don’t need to be complicated as well. Achieving that, however, comes with various challenges—«simplicity» is an art. And I also like the idea of «new closeness» because it highlights the value of interpersonal interaction… interaction between colleagues, clients, and freelancers. The more we talk to one another and think things through together, the greater the chance of «catching» an idea.

«An idea is like a fish—you can't create it out of thin air; you have to catch it.»

 

You «catch» ideas? I don’t think I’ve ever heard of that before.

I borrowed that phrase from David Lynch, one of my favorite filmmakers. He once said, «An idea is like a fish—you can’t create it out of thin air; you have to catch it.» To do that, you need people who know how to fish—which brings us back to the topic of recruiting. Take a look: «Snickers—You’re not you when you’re hungry» is a brilliant slogan. But it didn’t just suddenly appear on a blank sheet of paper; it was part of a long script that fell into the hands of our colleague David Lubars. And he saw that this one line alone outshines the entire script—that you don’t even need the rest of it anymore. He caught the fish, so to speak. Thirteen years and 81 countries later, the slogan still works.

 

You just emphasized the value of close, personal collaboration. I’m guessing you’re not a big fan of working from home?

No, I’m not, but I lost that internal battle. (laughs) I would have liked to bring people back to the office, but I couldn’t get my way. Yet we all agree—we work faster, better, have more fun, and learn more from each other when we’re in the office. So why should we only go in two or three days a week… or not at all anymore? On top of that, agencies are a bit like university hospitals: you get better by watching what others do. That’s only possible to a very limited extent—if at all—via Zoom.

 

But if the office offers so many advantages, why are so many employees reluctant to return to full-time work?

People need routines. During the pandemic, they therefore—naturally—developed routines adapted to the situation. They’ve gotten used to getting up, walking the dog, logging in remotely… for many, that’s the new normal. If you now tell these people, «Okay, come back to the office two days a week,» the office will still remain the exception to their everyday routine. Perhaps I should be more specific: I’m not opposed to working from home, but I’m not a fan of the idea of «hybrid work.» Because it’s such an in-between state… an existence in limbo. Our colleagues in New Zealand, under their fantastic boss Simon Vicars, conducted an experiment: everyone back at the agency full-time for three months, followed by a re-evaluation of the situation. And do you know what the result was? The employees themselves wanted to «stay.» Precisely because three months of full-time office work had reestablished itself as a routine. But I don’t want to complain for too long; globally, things are just the way they are.

 

So it seems your attitude toward working in the office hasn't changed as a result of the pandemic—but are there other things you've kept up that you developed back then?

I dress differently than I used to. Before COVID, suits, suspenders, and ties were the norm; today, it’s black turtlenecks. We were talking earlier about the Australian bank’s “breakup” campaign… I also had to part ways—with my tailor, to be exact. It was over the phone; he called me. Not an easy conversation, to be honest (laughs).

«I'm not a fan of working from home, but I lost that internal battle.»

 

You became Chairman of BBDO Worldwide in early October—after twenty years as the group’s CEO and President. You’ve said that you intend to take an active role in shaping your new position—what are your plans?

Three things are important to me: First, I want to help my successor as CEO, Nancy Reyes, in every way I can. By that, I don’t mean that I want to look over her shoulder and micromanage her; rather, I want to be there when she needs me. I’ve been in her position long enough to know that it can be a lonely job—that sometimes there’s no one to talk to who really understands you. I want Nancy to always feel that she can bounce ideas off of me. Second, I want to focus on expanding and nurturing our talent pool; there’s always room for improvement there. And third, I want to spend even more time with clients. I’ve always loved that—getting to know the people behind the brands, discussing how we can solve their problems. That’s how I envision my role as Chairman. And… to be completely honest… I’m incredibly excited about it.

---

Andrew Robertson has been Chairman of the Omnicom agency group since October 1, 2024 BBDO Worldwide. Prior to that, he had served as the company’s CEO and president for two decades—and achieved unprecedented success: During Robertson’s tenure, BBDO received seven «Network of the Year» awards at Cannes, among other accolades, as well as the first-ever «Network of the Decade» award presented at that festival. The global Effie Index named the group «Most Efficient Agency of the Year» five times. Robertson himself is considered one of the 100 most influential leaders in the fields of marketing, media, and technology—alongside figures such as Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, and Jeff Bezos.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming a cornerstone of competitive marketing strategies. It is fundamentally changing how companies interact with their target groups, create personalized experiences and optimize their processes. It is crucial for marketing leaders to understand the maturation process of AI in order to realize its full potential.

A journey in five phases

The journey to AI maturity in a company typically takes place in five phases. In the initialization phase, AI is recognized as a valuable asset, but concrete projects are still lacking. This is followed by the exploration phase, in which the first AI projects are launched, often for specific tasks such as customer segmentation. In the operational phase, AI solutions are integrated into some marketing processes, for example for automated email campaigns. The transformative phase is characterized by AI being used systematically across several areas and supporting personalized customer experiences. In the final, AI-driven phase, AI becomes a core element of the corporate strategy and continuously improves marketing performance.

A wide range of options ...

AI has many applications in marketing. Through predictive analysis, it enables more precise forecasts of customer behavior, which makes campaigns more effective. Hyper-personalization through AI systems creates tailored experiences for all customers based on extensive data analysis. The automation of repetitive tasks such as email campaigns significantly increases efficiency. In the area of content creation, generative AI tools can create and optimize compelling content. Sentiment analysis tools analyze customer interactions to capture moods and adapt strategies accordingly.

... but also some challenges

However, the integration of AI in marketing also poses challenges. Data silos are a major obstacle, as high-quality, integrated data is essential for the success of AI projects. Cultural resistance can occur as teams need to embrace data-based decision making and be open to new technologies. In addition, implementing AI requires technical and analytical skills that are still lacking in many companies, leading to a skills shortage.

Best practices in marketing

In order to use AI successfully, companies should follow a few best practices. It is advisable to start with effective projects that can show quick results. Investing in a solid data and technology infrastructure is essential. Creating cross-functional teams that involve different departments is crucial for success. It is equally important to track the impact and ROI of AI initiatives to prove their value through measurable business outcomes.

A look into the future

With the further development of AI technologies, their importance in marketing will continue to grow. It enables greater personalization, automation and insight generation. For leaders, integrating AI into their marketing strategies is essential to drive innovation and create better customer experiences.

Parallel to the digital transformation, we are seeing a paradigm shift in which new business models are gaining in importance. Companies that do not use AI early on risk being displaced by more innovative competitors. Existing business models could become obsolete, while new players that use AI effectively gain market share. Adaptation will be crucial in order to remain competitive and adapt to changing market conditions.

AI in the SWA

Artificial intelligence in marketing and communication is a key topic for the Swiss Advertising Client Association (SWA). Events, webinars and exchanges in the specialist groups take place throughout the year.

> www.swa-asa.ch

"Companies that do not use AI early on risk being displaced by more innovative competitors."

Image: unsplash.com / Allison Saeng.

In recent years, the creator economy has grown into a multi-billion-dollar industry. According to Goldman Sachs Research (2024), with an impressive value of 250 billion U.S. dollars, it has long since become an indispensable game-changer. Brands now face a challenging choice: either they harness the potential of this new economic force—or they risk losing significant market share to entirely new competitors.

Partnership Instead of Competition

The days when creators served merely as vehicles for advertising messages are now clearly a thing of the past. Today, they are the architects of their own brands. They use their reach and creativity to develop their own products, which their community celebrates and which are highly relevant to their respective target audiences. Success stories like Montes Energy Drinks, Capital Bra’s pizzas, or fitness influencer Pamela Reif’s exclusive product line impressively demonstrate that creators are not only active in the market but are actively shaping it through their own products—and often generating millions in revenue within their first year. For established brands, this makes them serious competitors. Collaborating with creators has become essential to remaining competitive in the long term. But how can companies best approach this? The answer lies in three key points:

1. Follow the hype: Identifying and Capitalizing on Trends

To lay the groundwork for success in the creator economy, brands must identify emerging creator trends early on and quickly capitalize on the resulting market potential. While this may sound obvious at first, in practice it is far from being universally implemented. This is because identifying potential in the «cultural trend game» of social media requires a solid «social listening» strategy. Only then can brands determine when people are talking about them or which topics they can be part of the conversation on.

«Brands that want to stay ahead of the curve must recognize and capitalize on the opportunities presented by the creator economy.»

A prime example of this was the hype surrounding the brown vintage GAP hoodie, which was sparked by creators on TikTok. GAP recognized the potential and reintroduced the hoodie to the market—even though it was no longer part of its product line. This successful campaign led to a significant increase in brand awareness among the target audience and, of course, to sales of a product that had essentially been phased out. The goal of «Follow the Hype» must therefore be to lay the groundwork for actively engaging with current creator trends and thus capitalizing on the dynamics of the market.

And that doesn’t just mean having the necessary tools at your disposal. It’s also about creating fast decision-making processes so that ideas and creative freedom can be put to optimal use. When brands realize that their product is going viral on social media but then need three months of feedback loops and campaign planning, they’ve usually missed the perfect moment. So what does it take? Attention, courage, and speed!

2. Jump on the bandwagon: Cleverly capitalize on existing trends

When brands are already actively participating in the «social game,» staying well-informed, and observing how cultural trends are constantly reshaping themselves, they quickly figure out what creators are interested in and what they like. This is a wonderful opportunity to collaborate in a targeted way. The perfect example of this: O-Mochi and Farina Opoku. The company recognized the creator’s love for O-Mochi and leveraged her enthusiasm to develop a new flavor—complete with its own packaging—in collaboration with her and bring it to supermarkets. The resulting campaign not only generated enormous reach but also led to a dramatic increase in the brand’s follower growth.

What’s the key here? Brands can’t just jump on the bandwagon; they have to create real added value. It’s not about having a creator promote an existing product, as is typically done with traditional testimonials. Rather, the creator should give the product its own unique touch. This increases the product’s relevance to the target audience and makes the brand much more accepted within the respective community. In this way, brands can ensure that they’re not just visible in the short term, but also increase their relevance over the long term.

3. Co-create the hype: Creating something new together

The most resource-intensive approach—but also the most promising when executed skillfully—is co-creation with a creator. Through close collaboration, new products or even entire product lines are developed together. Co-creation is more than just a collaboration—it is a true partnership on equal footing, in which both sides contribute their strengths to jointly create something new and unique for the target audience and the community.

And in this case, too, Farina Opoku provides a prime example: The natural cosmetics brand Annemarie Börlind and Opoku collaborated to develop new anti-aging eye pads that—in the creator’s favorite color—were perfectly tailored to the needs of the target audience and to visual communication for social media. After just seven weeks, the anti-aging eye pads were sold out in Annemarie Börlind’s online store. During this period, twelve times as many anti-aging eye pads were sold as hyaluronic acid eye pads, the brand’s previous bestseller. The co-creation also made it possible to position the brand as innovative and relevant within the community—a fact impressively demonstrated by the approximately 40 percent growth in followers on Annemarie Börlind’s Instagram channel during the campaign period.

Co-creations of this kind require particularly careful planning and a clear strategic direction. Companies must select creators who not only align with the brand but also appeal to the right target audience. In addition, they must ensure that the collaboration remains authentic over the long term and is based on mutual respect and the necessary trust.

The Solution to the Paradox

Despite the rising number of users of social media platforms worldwide and the enormous potential of the creator economy, the industry faces a real paradox today: On the one hand, it is growing rapidly and, according to Goldman Sachs Research (2024), is expected to reach a value of 480 billion U.S. dollars by 2027. On the other hand, «The State of Fashion Report 2024» by Business of Fashion and McKinsey shows that 68 percent of consumers are generally dissatisfied with the amount of sponsored content on social media. This contradiction poses challenges for brands even beyond the fashion sector.

Co-creation can be a key solution to this paradox. As consumers become increasingly skeptical of sponsored content, there is a greater need for relevance, authenticity, and trust. And that is exactly what happens when brands and creators work together to develop a high-quality, meaningful product and the accompanying campaigns—both of which are then perfectly tailored to the target audience and the community.

In summary, this means, first of all: Social listening is essential for identifying and understanding which cultural trends and creators are currently setting the tone, and whether your own brand can participate in an authentic and meaningful way. Second: Quick decision-making processes are needed so that brands can react and respond dynamically within the waves of trends. GAP has shown what this can look like. Third: Creators should be selected based on their interests and passions, not just their reach and supposed popularity. On this basis, meaningful potential can be explored and the right collaborations developed. Importantly: Creators are business partners and act as a voice for the target audience. They are not merely media placements. Fourth: The focus must be on a clear strategy that makes co-creation meaningful for both the brand and the creators. Jumping on every bandwagon and trying to be everywhere at once is not a strategy. At best, it comes across as inauthentic.

Conclusion: «Use it or lose it!»

Brands that want to stay ahead of the curve must therefore recognize and capitalize on the opportunities presented by the creator economy. Collaborating with creators isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s a necessity for remaining competitive in the long term, especially among younger target audiences, and for delivering relevant, target-audience-specific products and content on social media channels. Brands that miss the boat on this trend risk not only losing market share but also their relevance in the digital age. Brands, on the other hand, that have the courage to break new ground and invest in close partnerships with creators can be tomorrow’s (market) winners. So: «Use it or lose it!»

---

* Manuel Fassmann is Director of Strategy at Essence Mediacom, an agency that is part of Group M—and thus part of Germany's largest media agency network.

It feels as though that summer of 2024 was years ago, even though it has only just ended—too much has happened for us to reconcile it with the brevity of time: the assassination attempt (now even two!) on former President Donald Trump and the photograph of him that has been elevated to iconic status—the pressure on Joe Biden to step down; exerted through secret phone calls, public media, and via Hollywood stars—and finally: the rapid-fire coronation of Kamala Harris and her running mate Tim Walz as the new candidates on the Democratic ticket. By the time this column is published, there will be about six weeks left until the U.S. election—the outcome is still up in the air, with the polls swinging back and forth. No matter who wins in the end: From a (political) communications perspective, Kamala Harris’s team has already done a lot right—and acted under extreme pressure in a way that (regardless of the election outcome) will one day serve as a case study.

Submit …

First, the team (a mix of Joe Biden campaign veterans and Gen Z political newcomers:for platforms like TikTok) capitalized on the momentum and collective relief following Biden’s withdrawal from the race to thrust a previously relatively unknown vice president into the (inter)national spotlight. Content? No, not yet—at first, a wave of fun and positivity was more important, spiced up with memes («Kamala is a brat» or «You think you just fell out of a coconut tree?», topped off with matching emojis). This was followed by an increasingly combative tone in Harris’s statements, as well as the portrayal of the (previously completely unknown) Michigan Governor Tim Walz as «America’s Dad»—far more approachable than the «weird» Republicans Trump and Vance.

… have another …

When the pretty pictures were no longer enough, speed-dating with potential voters in battleground states was added to the mix, driven by hope and the future as core concepts and individual freedom as a guiding principle. And as an «interim highlight»: a TV debate in which not even Kamala Harris’s facial expressions seemed left to chance; yet in which she also commented on issues, took a stand, and stood firmly on the ground her team had prepared for her.

… stay positive!

Despite the harsh realities of politics, Harris never loses her signature smile or her «unique selling proposition»: she wants to be seen as a positive force standing up to her dark adversaries. Maximum polarization is called for, because without it, three months would be too short a time to win the trust of (at least half) the country. Whether it works out in the end or not, it certainly won’t be for lack of effort in her communication strategy.

---

Dr. Alexander Haldemann is the CEO of Publicis Groupe Switzerland.

m&k: Franzsika Saxler, you told me that while reading the book, your editor remarked that you were hiding behind the science a bit, and that personal influences would be good for the book. Were you able to accept that?

Franziska Saxler: Yes, absolutely. I’m a scientist, so I place a great deal of weight on data and facts. And this book was supposed to be a nonfiction work. But when I began to incorporate more of my own experiences alongside the data and facts, I could tell for myself that it benefited the book. It’s important to me, though, that this isn’t an indictment, but rather a book about sexual harassment and abuse of power in the workplace—and how we can protect ourselves from it.

 

Violence implies physical brutality. The title of your article suggests that sexual harassment can certainly occur without physical violence.

That's true, yes. Violence is a spectrum that ranges from humiliation and power games to sexual harassment and rape. One thing leads to another. Depending on power structures, this can foster sexual violence. Every form of violence leaves those affected with both psychological and physical harm.

«There are three mechanisms by which perpetrators justify violence to themselves: dehumanization, moral licensing, and victim-blaming.»

 

We have big debates about diversity, and inclusion is a hot topic, but there’s little to no discussion about sexual harassment. Why?

It’s a taboo subject. During my research, I repeatedly came across statements like, «We don’t have anything like that at our company.» But that doesn’t reflect reality. Those affected often have no voice; they aren’t heard, or sometimes they themselves don’t realize until later that what’s happening is harassment. It’s often very subtle and disguised in insidious ways. People who are harassed in this way don’t put a name to it; they simply realize that they no longer feel they belong there and leave the company—and sometimes even the industry. This leads to economic losses because good employees leave and must be replaced. On the other hand, it’s devastating for those affected because they’re under immense psychological strain—and they’re usually doing a good job that they love, only to end up leaving it behind.

 

Could you give an example from the book where this is described in a little more detail?

Yes, there was this boss who got a new assistant every year because no one could stand him and his lewd jokes, his insidious humiliations, and his sexist comments. But he kept insisting on hiring a woman. The women explained why they had quit. That cost the company a lot of money—lost productivity after their resignations, advertising the position, and onboarding new hires. The company could have saved itself all that expense if it had simply asked why the women were leaving. Or if they’d had an appropriate position within the company where people could feel safe talking about sexual harassment. And then they could have filled the management position—that would have been cheaper.

 

You're bringing up a problem that you yourself have experienced. Namely, once the legal system gets going, it immediately becomes a criminal matter. As a result, victims have to provide evidence, and in cases of doubt, the legal principle is always «in favor of the defendant.»

Yes, this is a problem that prevents many people from seeking help in the first place. The legal proceedings that are initiated when a complaint is filed are so grueling for the victims that they inevitably suffer psychological harm by that point. Anyone who has been through such an experience needs evidence—ideally, witnesses. Victims are forced to justify themselves as if they were the perpetrators. The perpetrators—who in the vast majority of cases are men—often hold higher positions in the hierarchy, use their leverage, and, when in doubt, have an expensive lawyer who tears the victim’s case apart. I had my own experiences at the university while writing my doctoral dissertation. I was never physically touched. That’s why, for a long time, I didn’t even realize that I had been harassed.

 

How did you realize that it was an act of violence?

I didn't really see it that way at first. From the very beginning, I found my dissertation advisor to be toxic and sexist. I started having trouble sleeping and became very sad; I suffered from anxiety attacks. But I was dependent on him—the entire dissertation had been conceived in collaboration with him. Eleven other women and I decided to bring the issue to the attention of the university administration. This set in motion a process that was cruelly grueling. He denied everything, and a few months later I received a cease-and-desist letter demanding that I sign a pledge not to repeat a certain statement—or else my former supervisor would take further legal action against me. I didn’t sign it. I set aside my entire dissertation and left. It was clear to us that we were certainly not the only ones in the university community who had been subjected to sexual violence. And so we founded #metooscience, and were inundated with stories that made us realize the full extent of the problem. The stories are shocking. Finally, these people—and it’s not just women who are harassed, but all underrepresented groups in society—had a chance to speak out. It’s incredible what we’ve set in motion.

 

The University of Bern offered a research program on workplace harassment. You applied and were accepted. You were able to write your dissertation on the topic, conduct research, and now write this book as well. What led you to choose the title «He Didn’t Even Touch You»?

The title sums up what those affected have to deal with. The statement is a myth. It suggests that they are exaggerating.

 

What do you mean by "myth," and are there any others?

I’ve done a lot of research on workplace harassment, since it’s the topic of my doctoral dissertation. There are quite a few myths surrounding the issue, and because we know so little about the reality of the situation, these myths continue to be perpetuated. One myth goes, «What’s all the fuss about? He didn’t even touch you.» Another is, «Why didn’t you fight back?» or «It’s your own fault—the way you dress.» Equally insidious is the myth, «But you two liked each other—you’re definitely exaggerating; he didn’t mean it that way.».

«Most companies are willing to do whatever it takes to ensure that their employees feel safe and secure.»

 

You write that women often react differently to stress than men. Could you elaborate on that a bit?

Studies on stress responses have mostly been conducted on male subjects, and they show that humans typically react to stress with a fight-or-flight response. However, it has been proven that women often exhibit different reactions: «fawn» and «freeze.» «Fawn» could also be called “people-pleasing.” When the body realizes that neither flight (too slow) nor fight (too weak) is an option, it reflexively attempts to take on a mediating role, foster connection, and thus de-escalate the situation.

 

And Freeze?

"Freeze" means playing dead. The body goes rigid; the person can no longer move and is frozen in place. By doing this, the body hopes that the attention will subside and the danger will pass. It also gathers strength so that, at exactly the right moment, it can still defend itself and flee.

 

When does fun end and sexual harassment begin?

This is usually a gradual process, though those affected can sense very quickly when the atmosphere becomes toxic. It’s important to know that harassment has nothing to do with love—it’s always about power and hostility. Perpetrators may derive pleasure from humiliating others or may feel threatened.

«We're on the right track, but there are still a few battles to be fought—especially in the minds of society.»

 

What do you mean?

Research shows that self-confident women, in particular, come across as provocative. They are supposed to be kept in their place in a toxic power dynamic. When these women say «no» and thereby clearly set boundaries, it can escalate the situation. In experimental settings, researchers compared how men react when women say things like, «I want to call the shots here.» This encourages sexualized violence. «I just want to do my job,» on the other hand, doesn’t come across as provocative. Hierarchical structures in society are often still male-dominated.

 

If victims fight back and the case goes to criminal trial, they should be «good victims» so that people will believe them at all. What are «good victims»?

Society has a certain image of victims, especially female ones. They’re expected to conform to gender norms in order to be believed at all. That means a married woman who never drinks alcohol, doesn’t dress provocatively, and detests sex—except, of course, with her husband in their marital bed. A woman is a “good” victim if she fights back, screams, and is nevertheless overpowered by the evil perpetrator. Of course, a “good” woman has also been taught not to scream loudly or defend herself physically, but rather to be sweet and well-behaved, courteous, willing to compromise, and subservient. You see, we can’t do it right—that’s sick.

«Companies should stop denying the problem by saying, ‚That kind of thing doesn't happen here.’»

 

Does that mean, conversely, that a self-confident person who likes to party, dresses according to their own tastes, and—when in doubt—still looks good, is basically a «bad victim» to begin with?

Yes, those myths take root in people’s minds. Like, «If you walk around like that, you shouldn’t be surprised,» or «She was drunk—well, then she probably wanted it that way and even had fun» …

 

You already mentioned that it is not only women who are victims of sexual violence, but all people—especially those who are underrepresented or who do not otherwise conform to gender norms.

 

Yes, on the #metooscience platform, we have received many messages from transgender people, gay people, and people of color who have gone through terrible experiences.

Let's turn to the question: What needs to change so that the workplace becomes a safe space where everyone can contribute their skills?

 

First and foremost, companies should stop denying the problem. «That doesn’t happen here» is the first defense mechanism. It’s always worth taking a closer look—for example, through anonymous surveys.

And if that happens, what specific steps could companies take?

Most companies are willing to do whatever it takes to ensure that employees feel safe and protected. We should all learn to listen so that those affected feel comfortable speaking up. Low-threshold support services should help ensure a safe space where they can speak without immediately having to provide evidence, witnesses, or justifications. However, this is a delicate matter because HR managers are usually not independent and therefore not neutral. In cases of doubt, they know the perpetrators, and an immediate reflex kicks in to protect their own company. And just like that, they’re back in a position where they feel obligated to take action. Most victims don’t want revenge or to tarnish their own “nest” (the company); they simply want to do a good job and feel safe.

 

Why is the workplace, in particular, so prone to sexual violence?

Well, there are power imbalances, hierarchies, and structures of dependency, and these can contribute to harassment. But it’s very important to me to emphasize that this doesn’t always happen, nor is it inevitable. Power, when used correctly, can have positive effects. It gives you the leverage to bring about change—the strength to set things in motion. There are prosocial leadership styles; we’ll get there sooner or later.

 

What exactly is that?

When people in positions of power are empathetic—people who don’t rest on their power or define themselves by it, but rather use it as a tool to make the team better—that’s what we call prosocial leadership. It’s important that it’s not just the loud, aggressive, and pushy people who end up in positions of power. These traits are still more often attributed to boys in how they’re raised. Girls are socialized to be more well-behaved and to be mindful of how others are doing. Yet there are loud girls and quiet boys; everyone should be allowed to express their own personality without being pigeonholed. Then it wouldn’t be the loudest or most assertive person who gets the job, but the person who is truly best suited for the position in question.

 

Allow me to ask one last, very personal question. You dedicate the book to your mother, your grandmothers, and your great-grandmothers. Why?

(Franziska Saxler’s eyes well up with tears) I’m glad you asked me that. There was a moment when I was overcome by a pain that has been passed down through the generations. Every woman is harassed at some point in her life. Presumably, one in three women is raped. I felt the pain of my ancestors. That creates a bond, but it also triggers trauma. This trauma is passed down to daughters. It was important to me to dedicate this book to my female ancestors.

---

Franziska Saxler works at the Institute of Psychology at the University of Bern, and her doctoral dissertation examines the long-term effects of workplace harassment.

Together with two other psychologists, Saxler takes a psychological look at Germany’s most popular trash TV shows in the weekly podcast «Die Trashologinnen.» Drawing on their individual expertise, they attempt to examine the shows from different perspectives.

As Chief Growth Officer of Publicis Groupe in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, Christoph Pietsch is responsible, among other things, for the group’s business development—but he is also a passionate «community builder» who launches initiatives, entire networks, platforms, and event formats. In recognition of his diverse volunteer work and his role as a «beacon of the industry,» he has been honored this year as «Brave Heart 2024» by the 80-member CMO jury of The Best Agency. He was nominated by Dr. Martell Beck, Head of Marketing & PR (CMO) at Deutsche Bahn AG, and Frank Roth, Head of Knowledge & Communication at B·A·D Gesundheitsvorsorge und Sicherheitstechnik GmbH. We spoke with the award winner.

 

m&k: Christoph Pietsch, first of all, congratulations on being named «Brave Heart 2024»!

Christoph Pietsch: Thank you very much—I’m truly delighted to receive this award. Especially when you consider the high-caliber jury that presents it. That’s why the entire The Best Agency community means so much to us. This is where the people we’d love to work with every day as an agency group are recognized. Nothing but great brands and the marketers behind them. It makes us feel very, very flattered. A huge thank you to the organizers, the jury, the teams at the agencies, and all the wonderful people involved.

 

You were also recently named a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum. How does that feel?

For me personally, this acceptance—just like being named a «Brave Heart 2024»—is, first and foremost, a tremendous blessing. And before the first meeting of the «Class of 2024,» I was incredibly curious. I was curious about the people from all over the world, their perspectives, and their stories. And, of course, I felt humbled by this impressive, diverse, and multi-professional community. Communicators tend to be something of an oddity there, but what unites everyone is that they’re striving for more than «just» doing a good job and being successful. These are young people who want to make a difference. Over the next three years of the program, the participants now have the chance to learn from and alongside UN officials, Michelin-starred chefs, artists, founders, scientists, politicians, and entrepreneurs. That makes it totally exciting.

 

«Wanting to make a difference»—those are big words. How do you define that for yourself?

That’s true—it sounds ambitious, but it usually starts out small and simple. For me, it’s all those people who step outside their comfort zones, get involved, and don’t focus exclusively on their jobs and careers who really make a difference. When you get involved, nurture your network, and think in terms of «give and take,» you not only meet incredibly smart people but are also enriched by shared ideas. Sometimes you meet these people within the agency. But sometimes you meet them outside the agency as well. And it all starts with thinking beyond your job title. It just feels good—for yourself, your circle, and the industry.

«It makes us all happier to do great work with great people.»

 

Which projects are particularly close to your heart?

I am particularly committed to the areas that fascinate me and where creativity and communication can play key roles—and that, of course, includes our industry. I’m also convinced that creativity and entrepreneurial action can positively transform society and the economy and bring people together. That’s why I’m a founding member of the sustainability movement «Enkelfähig,» have been involved with the GWA, and am active in the New Business Circle Germany. I’m also involved with the «Du bist wertvoll» Foundation, which focuses on helping children develop their creative potential, as well as with municipal and state-level innovation committees and art and culture projects. And then, of course, there’s my own small and wonderful community, «Creative Hive.».

 

«Hive» is featured in this magazine with a major study—but could you briefly explain it again: What exactly is it?

«Creative Hive» has now grown into a community of 3,500 people. We began just under seven years ago by bringing together people with diverse knowledge and skills from various industries. After all, when inspiration from one’s own bubble is no longer enough, we need concepts, ideas, and perspectives from outside worlds. Whether you’re a corporate manager, a startup, part of an accelerator program, or a creative professional in the arts and culture, marketing, science, or technology—«cross-industry» collaboration is the order of the day. We place great emphasis on combining leadership with top talent. The platform provides inspiration and professional development, and sometimes serves as the spark that ignites projects and business ventures. Through events, meetups, and community gatherings, we bring the «Hive» to life. Our grand mission—and yes, we’re still a long way from achieving it—is to build the «Davos of the creative world.» But we still have a little time… (laughs)

 

What advice would you give to young people who also want to get particularly involved—whether in a professional setting or outside of it?

First of all: I’m not sure if I should be giving others wise advice. But maybe it’s like this: The many different environments and the wide variety of topics have always given me so much—even today. Both personally and professionally. And I know just how much fun it can be to work with like-minded people. There are so many questions waiting for answers from creative and motivated people. And in the end, it’s really quite simple: it makes us all happier to create great work with great people.

---

The Best Agency is a seal of quality for the German-speaking marketing and agency industry and will be presented for the seventh time in 2024. The award honors the best agencies from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. A high-caliber jury, consisting exclusively of marketing decision-makers, evaluates entries in various categories. The winners will be honored on October 10 at a festive gala in Hamburg and featured in the winter issue of m&k. The The «Brave Heart 2024» Best Agency Special Award went to Christoph Pietsch. Why was he nominated?

«Christoph firmly believes that creative people can change the world for the better; you just have to connect them with leaders from various disciplines. To that end, he—a gifted networker and people person—founded the ‚Creative Hive‘ initiative, which has quickly attracted thousands of people and provided important momentum for our industry. This extraordinary commitment is why, in my view, he is the ‚Brave Heart 2024.‘» – Dr. Martell Beck, Head of Marketing & PR (CMO), Deutsche Bahn AG

«Christoph can’t do it without his team. He’s what we commonly call a leader: someone who inspires and motivates. Someone who drives his team forward. Or as he would put it: someone who does great things with great people. He wants to excel in every competition and be among the best. But always with sportsmanship and a passion typical of a near-professional soccer player. The fact that he can also handle defeat—which is hardly surprising, given that he’s a former player and die-hard fan of KFC Uerdingen—makes him the ‚Brave Heart 2024.‘» Frank Roth, Head of Knowledge & Communication, B·A·D Gesundheitsvorsorge und Sicherheitstechnik GmbH

• Agency Name: Erdmannpeisker
• Establishment date: September 1, 1999
• Founder: Sybille Erdmann, Gabriel Peisker
• Number of employees: 9
• Current customers: Swisslos, Emmi, Lindt, Dr. Oetker, Bimbosan, Schweizer Ei, City of Biel, Vigory, Hatex, Nectaflor, HEKS, Fastenaktion, Quickline, suissetec

Which campaign from the past twelve months are you particularly proud of?

Vigory—an optimization center for maximum vitality in the second half of life. For the opening of the first center in Winterthur, we were able to take a completely fresh approach to the same old “over-50” messaging and present it with plenty of enthusiasm and wit. This approach runs through the entire brand identity, from positioning to the name, brand guidelines, and advertising, all the way to the social media strategy. We communicate in a fresh, inspiring, and empathetic way.

 

The most important campaign in agency history to date - and why?

It was a tough one—we were divided on it within the agency. The engagement campaign for Mammut was, after all, something completely new that attracted international attention. For the events surrounding the photo shoot, we often had so many sign-ups from all over Europe that only a fraction could attend, so we had to cast the participants. And the ads featuring Röbi Bösch’s photos appeared in countless national and international newspapers and on the biggest blogs. The campaign won national and international awards, including a Gold Effie, the Marketing Trophy, and the World Press Photo Award. But the image campaigns for Swisslos’s scratch-off tickets are also a lot of fun and enjoy very high name recognition in Switzerland. The TV commercial for the Advent scratch-off ticket, in particular, is pure Christmas magic. It’s rare to find such openness to developing surprising commercials—it really lets us go all out.

 

The most offbeat place your creatives retreat to be creative?

Everyone goes wherever they want. The distances in Biel are short, so sometimes a team heads out onto the lake or takes the Funic to Magglingen to soak up the sun.

 

What do you do when you have thought blocks?

Play table tennis—and keep working.

 

What is your agency philosophy?

Fascination and function are our yin and yang. As a creative agency, it goes without saying that we win over our clients through compelling communication. But we can only retain them for years to come if our collaboration works day in and day out.

«No one works 100% here. Want to work from New Zealand for three months? No problem. A six-month sabbatical? Go for it.»

 

Why should talented people definitely come to work for you?

No one works 100% here. Want to work from New Zealand for three months? No problem. A six-month sabbatical? Go for it. Kids are sick, a contractor is at home, too much snow on the streets—just switch to working from home and send a message in the chat.

 

On average, how long do employees stay with your company?

12 years with our employees and 10 years with our customers.

 

How old is your youngest employee, and how old is your oldest?

19/61.

 

How high are the wages you pay compared to the industry average?

We are in line with the industry average.

«Fascination and function are our yin and yang.»

 

How much overtime do you work on average per week?

Thanks to good planning, there have been surprisingly few of them in recent years. But it's not always possible to avoid them before exams.

 

What benefits do you offer to compensate your employees for this overtime?

Overtime is compensated whenever possible, and there are occasional special payments. To celebrate the agency's 20th anniversary, employees received an additional month of paid vacation.

 

How long do you get maternity leave and how long paternity leave?

At least the length required by law, but many have also taken several months off with job security.

 

What is the current quota of women?

80%.

 

Do you employ interns?

We hire interns, have been training graphic design apprentices for 20 years, and take on 15 to 20 high school students each year. This often leaves people in the industry scratching their heads…

 

Do you organize team events?

Every year, we have an agency outing. The team organized the last one in Budapest. Right now, though, we're running behind schedule.

 

Do you have an agency dog or other mascot?

There's a very low-maintenance agency dog—our Diamond Dog.

 

Where do you drink your after-work beer?

Mostly at home, since almost everyone has a family and wants to go home.

On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump raised his right hand to take the oath of office in front of the Capitol in Washington: «I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear …» On the National Mall, which stretches from Capitol Hill to the Lincoln Memorial, many thousands of people watched Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 45th President of the United States. The very next day, a dispute arose over how many people were actually there. Sean Spicer, the first White House press secretary of Trump’s administration, accused the media of underestimating the size of the crowd.

Trump had predicted in advance that there would be «incredible, perhaps record-breaking turnout» at his inauguration. Afterward, he claimed that it had been «the largest crowd ever to attend an inauguration.» However, experts estimated the number of attendees at between 300,000 and 600,000 people. This means the number of people in attendance was only about one-third of the estimated 1.1 to 1.8 million people who attended Barack Obama’s inauguration in 2009. When communications advisor Kellyanne Conway was asked about White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s obvious false claim, she explained that these were simply «alternative facts.».

«When we talk about »fake news' today, we can already hear the word spoken in Donald Trump's voice."

Although the media were able to clearly prove, using photo comparisons, that significantly more people attended Barack Obama’s inauguration than Donald Trump’s, Trump stood by his claim. His crowd was larger, period. The president dismissed reports claiming the opposite as “fake news.” In doing so, he set the tone for his relationship with the media in the years to come. “Fake news” became Donald Trump’s battle cry, a term he used to portray media reports and news stories that did not suit him as untrue or manipulated. Trump and his loyalists are thus attempting to delegitimize the news media.

Who invented it?

When we talk about “fake news” today, we can already hear the word in Donald Trump’s voice, accompanied by his characteristic hand gestures. It’s as if he had invented the term. But he didn’t—neither the phenomenon nor the word for it.

Fake news has always been a part of political propaganda. An early example is *De Bello Gallico*, Julius Caesar’s account of the Gallic Wars. In it, Caesar—in true Trump fashion—massively exaggerated the strength and danger of the Gallic tribes in order to legitimize his war. He portrayed the Roman attacks as responses to Gallic provocations. He described himself as a superior and infallible military leader.

We see this pattern play out time and again throughout history, especially when it comes to justifying a war. A famous example is Adolf Hitler’s Reichstag speech at the start of the war on September 1, 1939: «We have been returning fire since 5:45 a.m.!» Hitler portrayed Germany as the victim that had been attacked. In reality, the attack on Poland had been planned well in advance. Disguised German SS troops were behind the alleged Polish attack.

On February 5, 2003, a similarly memorable lie was told, this time before the United Nations Security Council: U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction. Powell supported his claim with images and illustrations. It later turned out that it was all a lie and served only to legitimize the attack on Iraq.

Lying to Push Through Political Agendas

The false claims made by everyone from Julius Caesar to Colin Powell have always served to push through a particular policy. They are classic examples of “fake news”—literally, fabricated news. The source knows full well that what they’re claiming isn’t true. They spread the news because it serves their political goals. It’s propaganda.

«So the FDP ran its campaign using a fake image. And it's working.»

These are the two most important aspects of fake news: The sender knows that the story is false. They spread it because they are pursuing a specific goal. This also means that, for example, an incorrect weather forecast, a transmission error when reporting soccer scores, or a translation error are not fake news, but simply mistakes. Presumably, professional media outlets are less likely to spread false news today because the accuracy of a statement can be verified much more quickly.

False news goes viral

Newspapers, radio, and television, however, now account for only a small portion of media consumption. And things look different on the open internet. On Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X, fake news is widespread. The main reason for this is the way social media works. Users share interesting content, thereby spreading it further. Studies have shown that fake news is shared, on average, about seven times more often than real news. Fake news is often more exciting, funnier, and more surprising, and therefore attracts more attention than real news. That is why fake news is omnipresent on social media.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t stop there. False news spills over from social media into the real world and infects all reporting. In the simplest case, news outlets quote celebrities« false statements in quotation marks. The problem is that media consumers hardly pay attention to the quotation marks. So when a newspaper runs a headline claiming that a celebrity said, »The Earth is flat,” readers remember the statement in the headline. Even though the Flat Earth Society—which claims exactly that—has existed in the U.S. since 1956, most people probably know that the Earth is a sphere. But what about highly exaggerated or false statements made by politicians on current issues?

AI and Fake Images

This is especially true for fake images. Today, AI tools make it possible for virtually any computer user to create a deceptively realistic image. On social media, these fake images attract a lot of attention and, much like fake news, spread much faster than the bland photos that simply show reality. That alone would be bad enough. But because news outlets keep reporting on these fake photos, the poison of these false images is spreading into the real world as well and taking root in our minds—even when we all know the images are fake.

One example is a fake photo of Pope Francis wearing a stylish Balenciaga puffer jacket. The photo was first shared on Reddit and X, but was quickly picked up by newspapers and magazines. All the reports pointed out that the image was fake. Nevertheless, this iconic image of the pope in the Balenciaga jacket is now part of the collective memory. The same is true of images of Donald Trump in an orange American prison jumpsuit or of climate activists blocking an ambulance.

This latest example of an image from the «climate stickers» campaign was not spread by social media trolls. The Swiss FDP used the image in its campaign for the federal elections in October 2023. Although the image was small and labeled “generated with the help of AI,” it depicted a situation that never actually occurred in Switzerland. The FDP thus ran its campaign using a fake image—and it’s working.

«And because feelings are facts too, research data and feelings stand on equal footing.»

The same goes for Donald Trump. On his social media platform Truth Social, he recently suggested that Taylor Swift supports his presidential bid. He posted an AI-generated image of Swift with the caption «Taylor wants you to vote for Donald Trump.» Trump also shared images of women wearing «Swifties for Trump» T-shirts. These images were also fake. When reality doesn’t suit Trump, he simply uses AI to make it suit him. The man who accuses the media of producing fake news has himself become the biggest producer of fake news.

Fake news? Kellyanne Conway calls it «alternative facts.» As early as 1983, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a sociology professor and Democratic senator from New York, told his opponents: «Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.» In July 2016, Republican politician Newt Gingrich—then Speaker of the House of Representatives and thus one of the most influential figures in American politics—gave a remarkable interview on CNN about crime.

CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota says the crime rate in America has gone down. There are fewer violent crimes and fewer murders. Gingrich disagrees. The average American doesn’t think the crime rate has gone down. Camerota stands her ground: «But that’s the case. We’re safer.» Gingrich: «No, that’s just your perspective.» Camerota: «Those are the facts from the FBI.» Gingrich: «What I’m saying is also a fact. The prevailing view is that liberals have all these statistics, which may be accurate, but that’s not where people are coming from.» Camerota: «Wait a minute, Mr. Speaker, you’re saying that liberals are using these numbers—they’re using certain facts. But those are the figures from the FBI’s statistics—the FBI isn’t a liberal organization.» Gingrich: «People feel threatened.» Camerota: «Yes, people feel that way. But the facts don’t back that up.» Gingrich: «As a politician, I go with how people feel, and you go with the theorists.»

Facts Versus Emotions

At the time, Newt Gingrich’s remarks sparked controversy because they questioned the importance of data and statistics over subjective feelings. Gingrich said, “Feelings are facts, too.” That was shocking back then. Today, it’s the norm. What about the many scientific studies showing that the COVID-19 vaccine was well-tolerated and saved many lives? That cell phone radiation doesn’t cause cancer? That cities have become safer? All it takes, as with Newt Gingrich, is a shrug: “I feel differently.” And because feelings are also facts, study data and feelings stand on equal footing.

As early as 2004, in his book *The Post-Truth Era*, American author Ralph Keyes predicted that we were heading into a post-factual era. «Post-factual» means that facts and scientific findings take a back seat to emotions and ideological convictions. Philosophy puts it in more sober and abstract terms. For centuries, philosophers have grappled with the question of what truth is. In the process, three important conceptions of truth have emerged: The correspondence theory of truth examines consistency with reality. The coherence theory of truth examines consistency with other statements or beliefs. And the constructivist theory of truth examines consistency with one’s own perception.

Feelings are real, too—aren't they?

These three concepts of truth explain the problem we face when examining fake news. News is not just about correspondence with reality, but also about correspondence with beliefs and perceptions. If a news story contradicts my personal perception, I don’t believe it. That’s why no one can convince me that the sky is green. The problem arises when that perception doesn’t come from looking out the window, but from consuming obscure news channels on Telegram—and when those perceptions solidify over time into unshakable beliefs.

To make matters worse, in politics we often encounter statements that cannot be verified for their consistency with reality—for example, because they are predictions. Coherence theory and the constructivist theory of truth help us understand the mechanisms at work beneath the surface of language.

Researchers at the University of Münster have found that two groups in society are becoming increasingly at odds with one another: the defenders, who view change as a threat, and the explorers, who call for openness and diversity. These two camps are hardly willing to engage in dialogue anymore. Their perceptions of the world are so different that the worlds they construct for themselves differ dramatically. At the same time, the need for coherence with one’s own worldview is greater than the need to engage in dialogue with those who think differently. Everyone remains in their own bubble.

Fake news, therefore, isn’t just about truth or lies. It’s about the fact that more and more people have settled into a view of the world that they can only maintain through fake news. I call this the “cage of coherence.” People won’t let us destroy their cages by proving that fake news is false. That only leads to even greater isolation. I believe, rather, that we must lure them out of their cages by reconnecting with reality and thus building a new reality together.

It was a major step that the organizers of the popular Thuringia Day publicly announced last year: Without exception, there are no longer any promotional items at any of the booths at this colorful summer festival; instead, there are only printed bags containing tree seeds. The German folk festival, where tens of thousands of people celebrate together every two years, had always been an opportunity to stock up on numerous giveaways—whether colorful promotional pens, branded shopping cart tokens, or printed Frisbees. And then, suddenly, it was over. Tree seeds were meant to replace pens and other promotional items—purpose instead of plastic.

No one was disappointed. The reactions to the MDR’s Instagram post, which publicly announced the new development, all said the same thing: «Long overdue!», «Giveaways are so last century!», «It’s nice that there’s no hazardous waste. Nobody needs them.» The trend at the PSI trade show—Europe’s leading trade show for promotional products and incentives—paints a similar picture to that of the Thüringentag: While more than 900 exhibitors presented their new products in Düsseldorf in 2018, that number had dropped to 567 by 2024. Have promotional items had their day?

High-quality, useful, sustainable

The answer is a resounding no. That’s because companies still value the benefits of tactile advertising—just in a different way. For several years now, a shift in thinking has been taking hold in the use of promotional gifts: the “big gift-giving” trend: quality over quantity, “Made in Europe,” “Made in Germany,” or “Swiss-made” instead of “Made in China,” sustainable and useful rather than disposable and aimless. And the focus on the recipients is also shifting in a different direction: Instead of indiscriminately handing out promotional items to walk-in customers who are happy to get something for free, in these times of the “war for talent,” it’s becoming increasingly important to also treat employees and one’s own team well—with gifts they truly want.

«More and more new players are entering the market, impressing with their innovative ideas.»

This is a trend that Chalwa Heigl has also noticed. With her startup Clouberry, she has founded a company that aims to do things differently: gifts with meaning and thoughtfulness, with passion and vision (see also the interview)—that’s how she describes it herself. «I see a clear shift toward employee gifts,» says the PR and brand development expert. «More and more companies are realizing that there’s no point in buying cheap, mass-produced items and handing them out to as many people as possible.» Especially for brands with a certain standard, she notes, this has long been a no-go. Instead of lots of small, useless items that nobody needs, the key today is to think about what the target audience really needs—and it’s perfectly fine to ask them directly. «Why not simply ask customers or employees directly what they really like and what they’d like to receive?» says Chalwa Heigl. The advantage: Companies not only get a list of meaningful ideas, but also show that they care—that their audience is important to them. So instead of a T-shirt with a bold logo, the list might include items that make an impact, serve a purpose—and suit the recipient. Maybe not tree seeds, either. While they’re certainly meaningful, not everyone has a garden where they can plant them.

Startups with New Approaches

On the supplier side, too, many are rethinking their approach. More and more new players are entering the market, winning people over with innovative ideas. Take Re-Shirt, for example—a young Munich-based startup that enables companies to get their logos and messages across to people in a striking way on T-shirts. But at the same time, the founders have developed the world’s first reversible textile ink that washes out, ensuring that recipients will still enjoy wearing the T-shirts even after the corporate event is over. This means that messages for events or logos are temporarily printed on the shirts—and disappear after a single wash cycle.

Gifts Made from Unused Company Materials

Among other things, Monday Merch focuses on gifts for onboarding new employees: for example, the company culture merch package, which includes a subtly printed hoodie, a low-key cap, practical socks, and a sustainable mug with a handle. Or the Commuter Pack, which includes a vegan leather backpack, a notebook, and a pen—all of which will surely come in handy on the train.

«There's no point in buying cheap, mass-produced goods and distributing them to as many people as possible.»

The Berlin-based company Moot produces sustainable promotional items and corporate fashion from unused company materials or production surplus. For example, cute toiletry bags made from overproduced bags of gummy bears or shopping bags made from old branded pillowcases. Upon request, Moot even provides its own textile collection bins at companies so that employees can also donate unused items for upcycling projects—thereby becoming part of the cycle themselves. A win-win.

Sustainability: An Ever-Present Topic

Sustainability has been one of the top priorities for the promotional products industry for years now. Hardly any supplier can do without its own sustainability section on its website anymore, where you’ll find pens made of cork and corn, power banks made of wheat straw, all sorts of items made from ocean plastic, vegan gummy bears in paper bags, and peanuts with a laser-engraved logo.

All of this shows that the industry has its finger on the pulse; it isn’t resting on its laurels—despite its still-substantial advertising volume (CHF 875 million in Switzerland; Swiss Advertising Statistics 2024)—but is thinking ahead. However, all stakeholders must do the same if long-term change is to occur and if the often substantial investments in promotional gifts are to pay off. While concepts for traditional advertising or PR campaigns are often developed well in advance, this is precisely what’s often missing when it comes to tactile advertising. «Very few companies have a strategy for their corporate gifts,» says Chalwa Heigl. «And that’s even when large sums are involved.» The expert advises first considering what you actually want to achieve with the gifts. And: also think about storytelling and plan for potential follow-ups on social media. While developing a concept does require an initial investment, «if I have a strategy and a concept that fosters customer or employee loyalty, it ends up costing less than randomly giving away just anything.» Wouldn’t it be cheapest—and above all, most sustainable—to give nothing at all? Absolutely not, says Chalwa Heigl. «The appreciation expressed through a gift fosters lasting customer and employee loyalty. And that’s vital for a company’s survival!» In other words: Give gifts, yes, but with a plan. And don’t just give anything.

---

REQUESTED

«We need more strategy and plans»

Chalwa Heigl, CEO of Clouberry—a company specializing in sustainable and innovative promotional gifts—spoke with m&k about the topic of gift-giving.

m&k: How has the practice of corporate gift-giving changed in recent years—and what matters most today?

Chalwa Heigl: These days, companies would rather spend more money on a single product than on lots of small, inexpensive items that quickly end up in the trash.

 

Could you please go into a little more detail—how exactly is the money invested?

Instead of randomly handing out just anything to passersby at the trade show, companies are now making more selective investments. Ideally, they give away what their target audiences really want and need—and they do so in as personalized a way as possible. Employee retention and recruitment are top priorities here.

 

How are trends in gift-giving changing?

I see a certain shift toward products that have a positive impact.

 

Do you have an example?

Bicycle products, for example, support the shift toward sustainable transportation and improve safety. Water bottles that filter water or alkaline meal kits promote the health of customers and employees, while sponsoring an orange sapling in Tuscany benefits the environment—and delights the recipient when it eventually yields a jar of jam.

 

What challenges does the industry currently face?

Very few people have a real strategy or plan. Often, they don’t think the issue through to its logical conclusion. Storytelling, added value, how to extend the topic on social media—many people don’t even think about these things, yet they still spend huge sums of money.

 

What's your most important tip?

Plan ahead and think things through—it also saves money.

m&k: Sigmar Gabriel, as Chairman of Atlantik-Brücke, you head an institution that allows an enormously in-depth look at the workings of American politics and society. When you look at the country today, talk to Americans, travel ... what is your impression of the state, of the state of mind in the USA?

Sigmar Gabriel: When we talk about the USA, we must always bear in mind that we cannot draw comparisons with a country like Switzerland or Austria, but rather with a continent like Europe. It is therefore difficult to say: the USA ... the regions, the opinions are enormously different. Unfortunately, this goes hand in hand with the fact that the country has been deeply divided internally for some years now - not only economically, but also politically and culturally, and that is a problem for us as the West as a whole - for us as countries and states that are committed to enlightenment and liberal thinking. The USA is known to be the last leading power to defend the normative West.

 

You just said that the internal division in the USA has existed "for several years". Do you remember moments in the past when you realized that something was changing? Something is changing here - at best before other people were able to recognize it?

About two decades ago, I gave a lecture at the University Club in New York City. At the dinner afterwards, the editor of the International Herald Tribune, now part of the New York Times, sat next to me. We talked a little and I wondered why he seemed so serious. So I asked him. And he answered, quite spontaneously: "I don't recognize my country." The United States of America, he said, was taking a dramatic turn for the worse; and I honestly didn't understand what he meant at all. New York City was the final stop on my trip, we had been to Silicon Valley, I thought everything was fantastic (laughs). Then in 2009, the Tea Party movement emerged, and suddenly you could see that the person I was talking to must have had a dark premonition. In the meantime ... the Republican Party as we knew it - a party that was often even closer to us than the Democrats, with presidents who held their hands in the fire for Europe, for Germany - practically no longer exists. Of course, there are also people who go back much further in these developments than to the formation of the "Tea Party", but that is ultimately a question of interpretation.

"In the meantime (...) the Republican Party as we knew it practically no longer exists."

 

If we want to discuss events of historic proportions, we don't have to go back years - weeks are actually enough: this summer, we have seen many things that have never happened before in this form. We have seen an American president, Joe Biden, drop out of the election campaign relatively shortly before his party's "coronation mass" - and observe how his successor, Kamala Harris, now has to launch her election campaign at the "speed of sound". In your opinion, how did all this come about? And can an election campaign with so little lead time be successful at all?

In terms of Joe Biden's chances of re-election, we first need to look at how he came to office the first time around. Those were very special circumstances: the pandemic wasn't over yet, he was able to campaign from home. And he didn't win the 2020 election by a margin of millions of votes, but mainly by tens of thousands of votes in key swing states. You know the US electoral system: in the end, it comes down to the electoral votes that a candidate can gather behind him or her. Would Biden have won another narrow victory in 2024? Nobody knows. There was also the fear of a "landslide" in which many of his colleagues in the Senate and House of Representatives would also lose their seats - and in the end it all became too risky, it all became too much. It became clear that he would no longer be able to withstand such a stress test. This is not without a certain tragedy, because Biden has a better political record in many areas than Obama; and because people also sympathized with him because of his personal fate. But: it is worthy of all honor that he has taken himself out of the fight for the highest, most powerful office in the world.

 

But an election campaign in three months - with a vice president who has tended to operate behind the scenes and a governor who has yet to gain national recognition - is also a risk, isn't it?

First of all, I would argue that a longer election campaign is not necessarily better - it can also sap your strength, mistakes can happen, the global situation can change. So I think what the Democrats have already achieved is that the race is open again. It would therefore be far too early to make any predictions - Trump can be re-elected, Harris can win. Strategically, I have to say, she is simply the perfect counter-image to him: woman - man, colored - white, prosecutor - defendant (laughs) ... and this conflict creates communication, creates visibility. People have to see clear differences, otherwise nobody will be interested in the election campaign. And Tim Walz ... well, you're right, he hasn't had a national stage yet, but he's also an excellent strategic choice. Again, he is very different from Harris, seems shirt-sleeved, close to the people, yet clear in his convictions. Incidentally, I find it interesting that people often say about him that he "speaks the language of the people" - which implies that politicians generally tend to express themselves in a rather complicated way (laughs). Walz addresses groups of people that Harris may not reach - unlike JD Vance, who is simply a bad copy of Donald Trump. Vance offers no added value in this respect, unlike Mike Pence back then.

 

You yourself decided not to run for chancellor in 2017 - and at the same time resigned from the chairmanship of the Social Democratic Party in Germany. Even if the circumstances were different: Could you also understand Joe Biden's struggle with himself, with his critics, from your experience in top politics?

In this specific case, I believe that people have probably already gone to him - called him - and told him in private: "Watch out, this is going wrong." But that was probably not his inner circle for a long time. In a position like Joe Biden's, you are surrounded by a "bubble" made up of people who all depend on you professionally - and whose power is also called into question if your power wanes. And these people are constantly saying: "You're a great guy, you're doing a great job!" The protagonists in the "bubble" are actually pursuing opportunistic goals, but of course they make it look different. And that probably explains in part why he struggled with himself for so long, even though the pressure from the party and the media was getting stronger and stronger. That's why I just said that the decision he made in the end was very honorable. It takes an almost superhuman objectivity towards yourself to let go of that kind of power. And ideally, you have a few real friends - which are rare in politics, by the way! - and family members who genuinely mean well and who are there to advise, to approach the matter with an open mind. All in all, I think he came out of it all right. There are much worse processes in politics - which I also had to experience in the SPD, first-hand and with others - where the knives are sharpened behind your back and as soon as you're out the door, they're tinkering with the end of your career. Politics is always capable of bringing out the best in people ... or the worst.

"People need to see clear differences, otherwise no one will be interested in the election campaign."

 

The media like to simplify - "Trump would be bad, Harris would be good" is the dominant narrative in reporting in German-speaking countries when it comes to the upcoming US elections. I have to admit that I feel the same way myself, but are we making things too easy for ourselves with this narrative?

Yes, we are making it far too easy for ourselves. For some time now, we have only been discussing the question of who will sit in the Oval Office - and of course there are big differences: Kamala Harris believes that the USA still needs allies in the 21st century, while Donald Trump thinks this is all a load of garbage. He sees himself as a "dealmaker"; he believes that the big boys sit around a table and determine world affairs ... while the others have to see how they get on. There is a lot at stake for Europe when it comes to the question of how willing the USA is to compromise and negotiate ... and the narrative you described probably still applies here. But what too many people fail to see is that the US - whether with Trump or Harris - is increasingly shifting its attention to the Indo-Pacific. No matter who moves into the White House, this is a trend that will continue. That's why the US wants to be relieved in Europe and Africa, wants us to take on more tasks. The situation might have been different if the Germans and Austrians hadn't made the huge mistake of torpedoing the free trade agreement with the Americans that was possible a few years ago ... a small window was open there, but it has long since closed again. That would have ensured stronger, lasting ties.

 

You say that the future US administration would expect us to provide relief in Europe and Africa - regardless of whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris wins the election. What expectations would the US have of Europe when it comes to its relationship with China?

I am very sure that Washington will demand that Europe enters into a much tougher conflict with China - which is a major problem for us. This is fundamentally different from Russia, from which we have sourced natural gas and oil, but which we are otherwise far superior to economically. China, on the other hand, is in many ways on a par with the European Union, and in some respects even ahead of it. A kind of ... "frenemy", an economic partner, but a political opponent. For the USA, cooperation with China is far less important than it is for us, which is why Washington focuses primarily on the rivalry for global supremacy. And of course it is not appreciated if we forge close economic ties with Beijing. To put it bluntly, we run the risk of economic relations with China one day becoming a "new Nordstream 2".

 

It all sounds as if Europe is heading for troubled times.

Yes, because we are at the end of a period that was characterized by the hope of globalization, free trade and the reduction of political conflicts. What follows now is uncertain. Instead of more peace, we are experiencing more war; instead of more cooperation, we are seeing the return of protectionism. This is a paradox in itself, because there have never been so many challenges that could only be solved by working together - but international politics and reality are heading in opposite directions. A kind of "North-South divide" has also emerged, in which the global South no longer accepts the North's claim to leadership. When we arrive and ask for support in the fight against Russia in Ukraine, we are told: "Aha, now we are supposed to help - but if 100,000 people die in our country because a war breaks out or there is a famine, then you don't care." Many leaders in the region in question don't like what's happening in Eastern Europe either - they don't want to be dominated by China or Russia either - but they are exercising restraint. We will have to discuss how we deal with this with the USA; it will demand a lot from us.

 

As an experienced foreign policy expert, I would like to ask you to comment on another popular narrative: Is Donald Trump really the isolationist he is generally described as?

I'm not sure if the term applies to him. Look, he really gets involved, he just does it ... differently. There is one constant with him that can also reassure us: Despite all his rhetoric, he hasn't started a war in four years in office. I remember how he used to talk about North Korea. He wanted to rain "fire and fury" on the country. What did he do in the end? He went there and met with the dictator. Nothing came of it, but at least it wasn't what many had feared. Or in 2019, when Iran targeted the Saudi oil industry with cruise missiles and drones - some officials in Saudi Arabia were probably hoping that the allied USA would "really show Iran". An Iranian general in Iraq was then specifically targeted, and that was that. Trump is skeptical when it comes to the use of the military; he has already - of all things! - said in a "Playboy" interview in the 1980s that he feared the escalation potential of conflicts between nuclear-armed states. But he is definitely partisan, he instigates trade wars ... the term "isolationist" therefore falls short for me. And another thing: politicians who oppose the deployment of American troops abroad can also be found on the left of the political spectrum. Bernie Sanders is a good example.

 

Do you think Donald Trump would leave NATO if he wins the election in November?

No. He can't. The vast majority of the American people - and the political leadership across both major parties - are in favor of NATO. But he doesn't have to leave in order to damage the alliance. Even the doubts that he repeatedly expresses can act as an invitation to someone like Vladimir Putin and thus cause enormous damage.

 

So you don't believe that Putin will stop once the war in Ukraine is over?

I am one of those people who have been wrong once about Russia and Vladimir Putin's policies - I would hate to make that mistake a second time. I used to believe that we would find a way to get along with him, but he obviously has the idea that he has to lead Russia back to its "old greatness". This is not just the Soviet Union, this is the Tsarist Empire ... and a successful, modern, democratic Ukraine in the immediate neighborhood does not fit into his concept. So he wages war. Putin sees that the world is in upheaval. He sees that the order we established after the Second World War is breaking down. And he wants to act as the representative of a superpower - not as the boss of an oil and gas station. That is his motive.

 

A few months ago, I spoke with A. Michael Spence, an American Nobel laureate in economics. Together with your former colleague Gordon Brown and the economist Mohamed El-Erian, he has written a book about the perma-crises of the present day and in our conversation he pleaded for us to "jump back and forth between the ice floes of our time as best we can". Pure pragmatism, in other words. But he also told me that Gordon Brown always contradicted him - you have to be idealistic, he said, and set up new institutions for international cooperation. What do you tend to do?

I simply wonder what kind of institutions they should be? We in Europe would do well not to rely on any structures that could end up failing, but to make ourselves strong wherever possible. I don't mean this primarily in military terms, although that is constantly being discussed ... but it will be a long time before we are in a position to defend ourselves. However, we have something else from which we can generate self-confidence: our economic power, our ability to innovate, an internal market that can be expanded further. We do not need to chase after the illusion that we will become "the United States of Europe", at least not in our lifetime ...

"It takes an almost superhuman objectivity towards yourself to let go of that kind of power."

 

... why not? That would be a nice idea.

I think that's a pretty far-fetched discussion. You won't be able to explain to the Poles why they fought for an autonomous nation state for two hundred years, and suddenly the good news of the week is supposed to be: "We're abolishing it in favor of Brussels!" That won't work. But we can do more among ourselves, with each other. We should make full use of Europe's - realistic - potential and stick together as best we can.

 

Do you think reforms of international institutions - such as the UN Security Council - are feasible?

Yes, but I would like to come back to the global South. The Security Council reflects the structures that prevailed after the end of the Second World War. There are permanent members like Great Britain and France - but no one from Africa, Latin America or India. That is absurd! When the UN Security Council met for the first time, these countries were seen as the "Third World", they were colonized ... it is absolutely understandable to me that they now want to have a greater say in international institutions. If this say is guaranteed, then perhaps the institutions will function better again.

 

Mr. Gabriel, two final questions: What makes you pessimistic at the moment? And what makes you optimistic?

What makes me pessimistic is the feeling that the world seems to have lost the memory of what wars mean; what the Second World War meant. You almost get the impression that in many corners of the world the next conflict is almost being wished for. I find what is happening in the Middle East terrible. The way in which a really big war is being ignited there is also terrible, as is the brutality with which Russia is waging war against Ukraine. What makes me optimistic is the experience of the European Union: so far, it is the only example in the world where bitter enmity and genocide have been turned into partnership and friendship in less than a generation - actually unimaginable! We have gone from, to use a metaphor, Auschwitz to Brussels in less than a lifetime. That shows what people are capable of when they really want something and when they have courageous political leaders. I don't think that after the Second World War everyone was enthusiastic about accepting the Germans - who had just been murdering and pillaging their way through the country - back into the society of civilized states. There will have been a lot of skepticism, but there were also politicians who were optimistic and to whom we owe decades of peace in the end. My hope is that this will also be possible in other parts of the world.

---

Sigmar Gabriel is a former German politician and current advisor and publicist. He was Federal Chairman of the SPD from November 2009 to March 2017 and Vice-Chancellor from December 2013 to March 2018. He has also held several ministerial posts, including German Foreign Minister. Since 2019, he has been Chairman of Atlantik-Brücke, which is committed to German-American cooperation in business and society.

 

This article first appeared in the m&k print edition 8-9/2024.