Sense and nonsense of the ADC
Frank Bodin's demands for ADC reform - a well-orchestrated exit farce?
Frank Bodin's demands for ADC reform - a well-orchestrated exit farce? Andreas Prokesch, Chairman of the Art Directors Club Switzerland (ADC), rejects Frank Bodin's philippic against ADC judging (WW 9/02) in an open letter and intends to stick to the ADC's internal timetable in the dispute over the judging process until the Annual General Meeting on May 23. I am pleased, dear Frank, that you are thinking about how the ADC, the ADC judging process and even the ADC members could be improved, and thank you for your efforts.
Some time ago, you emailed me your proposals, which you would rather have understood as demands, with the subject line "Thoughts on leaving". In my first reply, I wrote that I was asking you not to leave the ADC. Because you belong in the ADC. In a second reply, I explained in detail what I thought of your ideas. And in a third reply, I explained how we should proceed:
On March 15, the members of the Gold Jury met to assess the last judging and draw conclusions for the next judging. The Board of Directors met on March 19. On May 23, the ADC members will hold their annual general meeting and vote on any motions for the jury, among other things.
Contrary to what you are trying to imply ("discussion in a wider public forum is not desired and is seen as a threat"), I am by no means afraid of debate. However, for reasons of efficiency and a certain culture alone, I would have appreciated it if it had taken place first inside and then outside the club.
We will not allow ourselves to dictate the pace. And we will stick exactly to the sequence shown - regardless of what publicity you will bring to the ADC and yourself next.
With the best will in the world, I can't tell you any more at this point in time than I have already told you, and I don't want to repeat myself. Besides, I don't have the "reason why" to get over the complex details of the judging (25 percent rule, etc., etc.), your rather bold conclusions ("the ADC can't be a benchmark at the moment") and the rest of your pats on the back ("the ADC has a lot to offer").
an image problem for years") in public. That would just lead to an endless back and forth and solve neither the problem you have with the ADC nor the problem that the ADC increasingly has with you.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on two fundamental aspects.
The purpose of ADC judging
As a long-serving ADC member, I take a somewhat fundamental position: we meet once a year to debate what the difference is between above-average, outstanding and groundbreaking advertising - and to make the result public and thus a topic of discussion. Who wins an award is not important to me personally.
Year after year, there are many losers and relatively few winners in this debate. That is natural and logical. Regardless of all qualitative criteria. Regardless of any quantitative criteria. And even regardless of the qualities or supposed non-qualities of the jurors.
What I want to say is that every judging is ultimately a subjective matter, as much as one might hope for objectivity - just like the "Miss Switzerland" competition and even a football match.
Anyone who cannot accept this will always have a hard time with the result.
That doesn't mean you can't be frustrated, angry and disappointed. I hardly know anyone who wouldn't be at least a little disappointed after the ADC or any other judging. How you deal with it is entirely your own business and not that of the ADC.
The nonsense of ADC judging
The results of juries are increasingly being misused for marketing purposes - i.e. for external and internal positioning.
Let me illustrate this with an example: Agency XY has won gold in one of the many creative competitions in the USA with a piece of work. It trumpets this in a press release. At the same time, it points out that it "only" won bronze for the same work at ADC Switzerland. This is nonsensical (keyword apples, pears, bananas). And it's almost a bit unfair because the agency doesn't also point out that it submitted the same work in Bavaria, Cannes, the UK and elsewhere, but didn't win anything there.
Of course you can question the ADC. And also the ADC judging process and every ADC member. Or the procedure for being accepted into the ADC. This is exactly what we do very regularly and sometimes in an almost self-castigating way: at practically every board meeting, at every general meeting, at every other occasion. Nevertheless, the ADC Yearbook has undisputedly represented the relevant work of Swiss advertising for over 25 years. Nevertheless, the majority of ADC members are responsible for this work and therefore also have the competence to judge other work.
Knowing you, we can now look forward to a detailed response from you. However, the ADC will only respond to this once we have held the discussion, as described, at the Gold Jurors' Conference, in the Board of Directors and at the Annual General Meeting.
Andreas Prokesch, Chairman of the Art Directors Club Switzerland (ADC)
Some time ago, you emailed me your proposals, which you would rather have understood as demands, with the subject line "Thoughts on leaving". In my first reply, I wrote that I was asking you not to leave the ADC. Because you belong in the ADC. In a second reply, I explained in detail what I thought of your ideas. And in a third reply, I explained how we should proceed:
On March 15, the members of the Gold Jury met to assess the last judging and draw conclusions for the next judging. The Board of Directors met on March 19. On May 23, the ADC members will hold their annual general meeting and vote on any motions for the jury, among other things.
Contrary to what you are trying to imply ("discussion in a wider public forum is not desired and is seen as a threat"), I am by no means afraid of debate. However, for reasons of efficiency and a certain culture alone, I would have appreciated it if it had taken place first inside and then outside the club.
We will not allow ourselves to dictate the pace. And we will stick exactly to the sequence shown - regardless of what publicity you will bring to the ADC and yourself next.
With the best will in the world, I can't tell you any more at this point in time than I have already told you, and I don't want to repeat myself. Besides, I don't have the "reason why" to get over the complex details of the judging (25 percent rule, etc., etc.), your rather bold conclusions ("the ADC can't be a benchmark at the moment") and the rest of your pats on the back ("the ADC has a lot to offer").
an image problem for years") in public. That would just lead to an endless back and forth and solve neither the problem you have with the ADC nor the problem that the ADC increasingly has with you.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on two fundamental aspects.
The purpose of ADC judging
As a long-serving ADC member, I take a somewhat fundamental position: we meet once a year to debate what the difference is between above-average, outstanding and groundbreaking advertising - and to make the result public and thus a topic of discussion. Who wins an award is not important to me personally.
Year after year, there are many losers and relatively few winners in this debate. That is natural and logical. Regardless of all qualitative criteria. Regardless of any quantitative criteria. And even regardless of the qualities or supposed non-qualities of the jurors.
What I want to say is that every judging is ultimately a subjective matter, as much as one might hope for objectivity - just like the "Miss Switzerland" competition and even a football match.
Anyone who cannot accept this will always have a hard time with the result.
That doesn't mean you can't be frustrated, angry and disappointed. I hardly know anyone who wouldn't be at least a little disappointed after the ADC or any other judging. How you deal with it is entirely your own business and not that of the ADC.
The nonsense of ADC judging
The results of juries are increasingly being misused for marketing purposes - i.e. for external and internal positioning.
Let me illustrate this with an example: Agency XY has won gold in one of the many creative competitions in the USA with a piece of work. It trumpets this in a press release. At the same time, it points out that it "only" won bronze for the same work at ADC Switzerland. This is nonsensical (keyword apples, pears, bananas). And it's almost a bit unfair because the agency doesn't also point out that it submitted the same work in Bavaria, Cannes, the UK and elsewhere, but didn't win anything there.
Of course you can question the ADC. And also the ADC judging process and every ADC member. Or the procedure for being accepted into the ADC. This is exactly what we do very regularly and sometimes in an almost self-castigating way: at practically every board meeting, at every general meeting, at every other occasion. Nevertheless, the ADC Yearbook has undisputedly represented the relevant work of Swiss advertising for over 25 years. Nevertheless, the majority of ADC members are responsible for this work and therefore also have the competence to judge other work.
Knowing you, we can now look forward to a detailed response from you. However, the ADC will only respond to this once we have held the discussion, as described, at the Gold Jurors' Conference, in the Board of Directors and at the Annual General Meeting.
Andreas Prokesch, Chairman of the Art Directors Club Switzerland (ADC)
