Strategy Do we actually still need the advertising idea? In London, top strategists discussed the art of their profession. Pascal Schaub from Publicis followed "The Battle of Big Thinking". They dish it out and not in short supply. When the Account Planning Group invited the English this fall to debate the future of us all, they all came: strategists, marketing experts, media professionals, market researchers, branding experts and top advertisers. Their 15-minute presentations made the good old advertising agency look like a scarecrow from the last century. In good planner style, almost everyone started with the consumer. Today's consumers are well informed, have a worldwide choice and are often just one click away from success. They know what they want, and almost more precisely what they don't want. But that's not the problem, says new media expert John Owen. The decisive factor is that consumers today can also tell us what they don't like.
Even crazier. He does it too. In daily exchanges with millions and millions of people in forums, blogs and chats. The smaller and more specialized the target group, the greater the intensity. Brand denunciators can be found just as easily as brand fans. Ivan Pollard from Hotshop Naked therefore believes that it is no longer the media that matters. What matters is what happens after the point of contact with a brand message. The only thing that counts is whether it is spread by consumers.
From there it is a small step to "consumer created content". The community shoots the commercials themselves, uploads them to web platforms themselves and sends them to each other. Goodbye creation, media, direct marketing. Recently, customers have already been calling for this. The CEO of Procter & Gamble, A. G. Lafley, has instructed marketers to stop controlling their brands and to relinquish control and listen more to their customers. Undercurrent: advertising agencies are far too expensive, marketers can't decide what is a good and what is a better creative idea anyway, and monitoring success is conveniently built into "consumer created content", because only what is liked is viewed and sent on.
Other speakers vehemently state that this is the most miserable solution, pure self-abandonment, possibly born of incompetence or quite simply communication laziness. The clearest counter-example comes, of course, from Interbrand brand expert Andy Milligan. A brand is most successful when it is meticulously planned down to the smallest detail and managed by its owner.
"Geek Squad", the "computer geek instant help squad" demonstrates what is meant by well-conceived branding. If you call them about a computer breakdown, a snappy sheriff answers around the clock, guarantees arrival in an hour, appears in Geek Squad uniform (note the white socks), marches to the scene of the crime, marks it with yellow crime tape, solves the computer problem on the spot - leaving nothing behind except the imprint on the sidewalk with the Geek Squad logo from the branded sole of the foot. Everything is branding and it always requires an ingenious idea.
However, the majority of speakers agree that the best ideas today can no longer be advertising ideas. Jim Carroll, CEO of Bartle, Bogle, Hegarty, put it most tamely. In a world of "bashful brands", it is now the order of the day to make fun of brands and their appearance. Carroll still recommends advertising as a way out of this. But only if it is staged as a communicative seduction that networks. The big idea as a networking idea.
John Owen sums it up clearly: "Today, we need ideas that can be promoted, not advertising ideas. The lead agency principle has had its day. Owen would always have several agencies pitch for each job, each of which is top in its discipline: Web designers, advertisers, branding specialists and so on. All would have to commit to working together on the idea selected by the client, and all would be paid the same. Advertising becomes a by-product, a side effect.
Internet brands do not advertiseNot for nothing do the speakers repeatedly quote that the strong brands that have become big on the Internet have almost without exception achieved this without advertising campaigns. Google, Amazon, Craigslist, flickr, MySpace, Odeo. The list is long and getting longer all the time. The big provocation in this context is put forward by Russell Davies, the brilliant planning guru: A media budget of zero? Bring it on! Every brain cell in the win-win-win link. The connectivity idea is everything. The community does the rest. The creative director's primacy of ideas collapses. With his track record as Global Planning Director at Nike, Russell knows what he's talking about. After all, he was voted "Big Thinker of them all" by the audience to thunderous applause.
Brand communities without the Internet - almost unthinkable. If you are online, you are interactive. Those who are interactive are engaged in brand building. But let's take a closer look at web users, says Andrew Walmsley, founder of i-Level. Almost all of them have a penchant for pseudonyms, nicknames. Depending on the study, more than half of them pretend to be someone else online. Old geezers as innocent teenagers. Girls as boys. Young people as professors. Rich people as poor. Heteros as homos. The joy of role-playing is nothing new in itself, says Walmsley, we all know it from the dressing-up box in the nursery. It's just the extent of it that is completely new. Gamers spend an average of 20 hours a week on it.
No wonder the advertising industry is looking for opportunities to advertise in game worlds. The challenge: We don't have the slightest idea what kind of people are romping around in the game world, because the same person can be schizoid and split into two as an online character and an offline person. Specifically, a girls' platform seems to be an excellent place for tampon advertising, but Kukident would probably be much more effective there if the majority of users are not girls in real life. Good night.
New fundamental questionsThe three central questions for the communications industry are no longer: What to do in the face of the galloping fragmentation of markets, media and target groups? Instead, the three fundamental questions are: 1. what actually comes after the media, after the purchased advertising space, after the touch point - how does a message live on, circulate, multiply and change beyond our access and control? 2. what actually comes after the advertising idea, i.e. after creation - when consumers take up an idea, modify it, implement it themselves, think about it further, when an idea can no longer be owned but, in the best case, shared? And finally: 3. what actually comes after the target group - when every single consumer is so and so and so and so, lives an unfathomable role-playing game with which he leads everyone around by the nose, including himself, and we never know who we are really dealing with and what he really needs?
There are already some assumptions and answers. Less certain findings. The explosive conference cocktail of substance, charm and show showed at least a rudimentary way forward. This can only mean interdisciplinarity, teamwork and planning. By the way, what if the Account Planning Group Switzerland were to bring this new conference format to Switzerland next year?
The Battle of Big Thinking The rules:
21 speakers, 15 minutes speaking time each, the TED audience voting decides live in the hall on discipline and day winners.
The disciplines:
Branding, Marketing, Market Research, Media, New Media, Strategic
Planning, advertising.
The organizer:
The Account Planning Group UK, the association of strategic planners in England.
More on this, incl. blog,
at www.apg.org.uk Big Planning Thinker and overall winner: Russell Davies (Open Intelligence Agency) The thesis:
People love complexity. The answer from companies must be: Simplicity. And not didactic simplicity that supposedly creates clarity. But simplicity that creates the required complexity. Example 1:
Multimedia artist Brian Eno has created an image that has 77 million versions, based on simple software with simple rules. The viewer sees a different version each time, the instant original. Example 2:
On nike.com you are asked to send in a video you have made yourself. The only condition: A ball enters the picture from the left at the beginning and leaves the picture on the right at the end. The rest is history: created by the Nike community. The future belongs to those who give up control. And inventing the connectivity idea for it. Big media thinkers: Ivan Pollard (Naked) The thesis: the future belongs to "transmedia planning". Everything becomes a medium. But the medium is no longer important. It's what happens to the message after the point of contact. How and whether a message is passed on to the target group and develops its own momentum. Only then is brand value created. In the brand community. For the viral effect to happen, "collision engineering" is needed - instead of GRP calculations.
Big Thinker from Communications Agencies: Trevor Beattie (Beattie McGuiness Bungay) The thesis:
Big thinking is big schminking. It's boring. And intimidating. It puts customers on the defensive and creatives in a corner. It is not motivating and not inspiring. On the contrary, it's the small thoughts that can make life great. Small thoughts are approachable, accessible, infectious. They are better because they can be shared, because they can belong to everyone (co-ownership). Example:
The Bank of South Africa with the claim "Trust us" had chained the plastic pens for the customers. Chained! We were the first to cut the chains. Big Brand Thinker: Derek Day, Helen Edwards (Passionbrand) The thesis:
The answers to five rarely asked questions can take a brand further. 1. what can a brand stop doing to stay true to itself? 2. how can you make a product worse - and thereby achieve an innovative breakthrough? 3. how is a category currently screwing its consumers with its regularities? 4. what is in our customers' photo albums? 5. what gives a brand the right to exist? Many brands don't like this last question, but the others will change the world.
Big New Media Thinker: Mark Cridge (glue) The thesis:
All media will become digital. TV anyway. But the others too. A recent study shows that by the end of 2007, around 50 percent of all media consumed will be digital channels. Everything will be transparent on digital channels. The entire exchange of opinions. Opinions will be formed on the Internet. Ordinary people will tell the most powerful stories about brands.
The internet has already become the biggest source of word-of-mouth advertising. To paraphrase a well-known marketing quote: If digitalization got us into this mess - it may be digitalization that gets us out of it.
Pascal Schaub
The author is Head of Strategic Planning at Publicis and President of the Account Planning Group Switzerland.