Over the past six months, there has been some buzz within the ADC community about the volume of creative competitions and their judging. Various groups, initiators, critics spoke out in talks, policy papers, circular letters, others expressed themselves publicly in the press. As it happens, everyone was concerned with the same thing and everyone with something different.
Complaining about the proliferation of juries and awards is anything but new, nor is it limited to the Swiss market. In view of today's pressure on earnings and costs, however, the question of how far the investment in participation in all these competitions is justified is more topical than ever. The fact that the jury organizations are aware of their own economic interests and therefore also try to get enough entries with shortlist placements and additional categories cannot be blamed on them. Which is why the agencies have to ask themselves why they don't simply limit themselves to fewer entries with fewer juries - which no one is preventing them from doing.
The reason for this is that no agency wants to declare a unilateral truce in the war for trophies. The more awards won, the better the reputation of the creatives - and the more attractive the agencies are to them. Add to that the chance that clients will at least recognize the agencies' validation through awards as an additional qualification. The desired reduction in the volume of awards is therefore not left to the market; it is to be achieved, please, through a gentle regulatory measure.
So the official creative ranking of Werbewoche is supposed to fix it. By taking fewer competitions into account (a maximum of 10, compared with 18 just two years ago) and by recognizing fewer awards (for example, the shortlists of Swiss competitions are no longer recognized), while increasing the number of points awarded in favor of the higher awards. At the expense of the opportunity to be honored for a variety of above-average works, only the absolute creative highlights are to be increasingly recognized. Because they will therefore be far more selective in their submissions, this will, according to the calculation, ultimately ease the burden on the accounts of all agencies.
Werbewoche is to be thanked for allowing ADC, which as a jury organization is also a party, to help decide how the creative ranking should be structured. In the last round, the ADC board has now dealt intensively with all the facts as well as all the proposals - and has even gone beyond them in some cases. With a larger and progressive gradient between upper and lower ranks (from Grand Prix to Shortlist) and between competitions (from Cannes to Crossmedia), it clearly promotes "class over mass". The shortlists of the Swiss awards, which are rated much lower in this context, can thus remain considered without further ado (like those of all others). On the other hand, the errors that resulted from the additional differences in the allocation of points (counters) for the individual awards between the competitions for the past two years have been corrected. Suddenly, a bronze lion was worth far more than a bronze cube than a gold lion was worth than a gold cube - and the latter was worth four times more than a shortlist placement, while the gold lion in Cannes was only worth two and a half times more. The crux lies in the details here, too.
After heated discussion, the board also accepted that all competitions focused on a single media genre (such as Edi Film and Swiss Poster Award) should be disregarded in the creative ranking. This despite the ambivalence of ADC members sitting on their juries. As far as ADC is concerned, the budget reductions of the agencies with 30 percent less entries this year are already a fact. With its resolutions and their renewed coordination with the positions of Werbewoche (see box), the ADC board hopes to bring the discussions to a close for the time being. In the face of the often individual and thus very different interests, it also had to safeguard those of the ADC Institute.
The award business has also become a cut-throat market. Of course, ADC Switzerland also has to qualify for one of the remaining places. So it has to position itself correctly for this future. It stands in the environment of all juries for the creative Natio¬nalliga. The fact that this is being further devalued cannot be in its interest - nor in that of its members, who like to point out that today they jury far more strictly (according to the Cannes mode), and that their awards have therefore gained in value and not the opposite. Add to this the fact that ADC, on its new course since 2006, has consistently improved the desired relevance of its judging for advertising clients, the media and all market partners. The fact that these as partners, colleagues, promoters and sponsors today make common cause with the creatives of ADC will continue to be the case only if the latter lives up to its recognition.
Jean Etienne Aebi, President of ADC Switzerland
The creative ranking
The competitions for the creative ranking of Werbewoche are now fixed, in brackets the respective weighting factor of the competition: Cannes (5), Clio (5), D&AD (5), One Show (5), The Cup (5), ADC*E (4), Eurobest (3), ADC Switzerland (3), Effie (2), Crossmedia (1). Werbewoche has decided that in addition to these competitions, each agency can choose for itself from two international and two national awards those two that should also count for the ranking. These are: Epica (1), London International Award (1), Swiss Poster Award (1) and Edi (1). This is in response to the request of many agencies. The weighting factors for the individual ranks are as follows: 1 for Shortlist (Finalist, Merit, Book), 2 for Bronze (do. Edi: Special Edi, D&AD: Silver "Nomination"), 4 for Silver, 7 for Gold, 11 for Grand Prix (SPA: Overall Winner). For The Cup, 11 for Grand Cup, 7 for Cup, 4 for Nomination, for ADC*E 7 for Gold, 4 for Nomination. For LIA 7 for Grand Prize, 4 for Winner, 1 for Finalist. In addition, it was decided that for the Creative Ranking, only the highest award given applies if a campaign has won several (for several individual subjects) in the same jury category of a competition.