John Drake

Don't Forget The Emotion

"People think they're aren't frontiers anymore. They can't see how frontiers are all around us."

It's no secret that I've been doing a lot of posting about Wieden+Kennedy recently. But it's hard not to. If you're studying the industry and talking about the good stuff these days you have to mention Levi's, Nike, Old Spice, Honda UK and more.

Wieden has always been at the top of the trade, of course. But it just seems that within the last year they've surged ahead even more. And I think that's worth stopping and pondering for a second because the agency seems to have held on to something that many others have apparently forgotten:  the importance of balancing logic and emotion. 

As people, whenever we make decisions in our lives part of our decision-making is based on emotion while the other part is based on logic. The two work together. And there are varying degrees how we use each one which becomes most important in marketing. Some purchase decisions require very little emotion and more logic (insect repellent) while others require a lot of emotion and less logic (fashion). Most stuff, however, (the good stuff) embraces hearty doses of both.

But over the past two years advertising has largely been all logic. Which makes sense. Bob Liodice, President of the Association of National Advertisers, stated this well:

"For the average consumer, the emotional benefits took a back seat to understanding how a brand would deliver real value ... during the recession. ... In the recovery, we expect greater use of emotional benefits by aspiring brands to drive long-term health." *

Then add to this the fact that many web brands the industry studies and praises so highly are all logic positioned... 

"Check in. Find your friends. Unlock your city." Zero emotion, right? All logic. (The emotion, of course, is left up to the user experience.)

But the industry hasn't just been lacking large amounts of emotion in marketing. There are other ways the balance has been off...

Many brands have gone ALL emotion while others have produced a weird mix of NEITHER logic or emotion in the form of stunt/shock guerrilla marketing events.

But through all of this Wieden has largely kept a healthy balance of both logic and emotion in their work. From cars to body wash to pants to soda there's the logical reason to buy (Dodge/drive faster, Old Spice/smell better, Levi's/durable clothing, Coke/refreshment) and then the emotional lure to choose (Dodge/muscle car, Old Spice/woman-approved man, Levi's/all-American, Coke/happiness) all presented together.

And the work is working.

I'm sure there's other stuff they're doing over there. But it just seems to me that their balance of logic and emotion is what's really making their portfolio stand apart...

Maybe Your Agency Isn't Very Interesting

Not long ago I was chatting with a principal of an ad agency headquartered far away from the one I work at about credentials meetings. (You know, that sometimes awkward / sometimes wonderful meeting where a potential client and agency meet for the first time to see if there's chemistry?) He said that during this initial meeting his agency never talks about themselves at all. Rather, they immediately dive into the client's business.

Since then I've been asking around and this approach seems to be the growing consensus in our industry about how to approach the first meeting with potential clients. And that's all fine and good and important. Of course you need to talk about the client's business.

But what about your business?

Clients say agencies often feel the same.

It's not to hard to see why this is the case. We all start using the same language around the same time. We're in communications, after all, so word gets around pretty fast: "Integrated," "Fully Integrated," "Media Agnostic," "Joining the Conversation," "Cause Related Marketing," "Accountability,"...

You get the idea...

We also move around a lot. I think two and-a-half years is the current employee tenure at large shops. So there are nine million people who have "worked" on Nike, Budweiser and Coke.

As I was thinking about all this I was also keeping up with the Mirren Conference this week... My friend Adam posted this during Alex's presentation:

Appropriate coming from CP+B. Everyone has tried to emulate them for years.

Some still do.

So I wonder... if you're an agency that only talks about the client's business the first time you meet, if deep down inside you know your agency isn't very interesting.

If I'm a potential client, and I'm sitting across the table from Mother, I'm really interested to hear about mass roots, and perhaps even Dogmatic.

If I'm across from Anomaly, I'm interested in their different business model.

If I'm across from TBWA\Chiat\Day I'm interested in hearing about Disruption and Disruption Days.

From Naked's unique approach to Sid Lee's philosophy to Trumpet's venture funding program if I'm a potential client I want to hear that stuff. Things like this show an agency is dynamic. They understand things beyond marketing. They understand sales channels, distribution and most importantly, they think a-typically and have an opinion.

Proven success, measurement and quality creative will never be replaced. But today, how you work, what you do and how you do it is graded much higher than it was ten years ago. The opportunities for a creative company to be dynamic are vast today. This wasn't always the case. And our industry is full of some of the most creative business-minded people in the world... seems we should put this to more use.

So if you're an agency who refuses to talk about yourself because you don't think clients care, look inward. Perhaps there's not much to talk about. Because if there was, I bet they'd be interested in hearing it.

Innovation Presentation

Thinking About Innovation

A smart series of thoughts from Noah on innovation... Seems like a pretty good way to start the week. Particularly enjoyed what was on 13, 21, 51 and 67. But you have to read the full thing to really get what was on 13, 21, 51 and 67.

Change By Design

Over the holidays I had a chance to read Change By Design by IDEO CEO, Tim Brown. If you are at all interested in design, creativity and how these things can influence business, you should read it. Pick up a copy here. Some highlights include the importance of prototyping, the role of a blueprint and finding "T-Shaped" people. These things can apply to every business.

But more about those later...

For today, the thing that stuck out most to me is the importance of Empathy. Or, in other words, truly understanding the business challenge from the mindset of users.

If you work in marketing, ask yourself: How often are you in the field? How often are you out watching customer behavior? My guess is, not often enough. Especially these days...

It's tempting to think that we are connected because we are reading consumer tweets and blogs. But that's only half of it... The small irony is that the more we stop and read the less we physically observe. And if there's one thing that comes screaming out of the case studies in Change By Design it's the sheer amount of time that was spent in the field by IDEO design teams understanding, talking with and observing the needs of people in the user environment prior to concepting.

So in 2010 it's important not to be solely focused on the screen in front of us... be it a computer a mobile phone or a Kindle. Look up, watch, listen and take the time to link things together.

Change By Design is about "Design Thinking." And while the definition of Design Thinking is pretty much the entire book it was summed up nicely at one point as "translating observations into insights and insights into products and services that will improve lives."

Good stuff.

Being Initiated Makes Better Groups

PsyBlog had a fascinating post the other day about the dynamics of group psychology: 10 Rules that Govern Groups. You should read it. All 10 rules are interesting but #2 really made me think... The test is a bit weird, but the result are interesting:

#2. Initiation Rites Improve Group Evaluations

Existing groups don't let others join for free: the cost is sometimes monetary, sometimes intellectual, sometimes physical—but usually there is an initiation rite, even if it's well disguised.

Aronson and Mills (1959) tested the effect of initiation rites by making one group of women read passages from sexually explicit novels. Afterwards they rated the group they had joined much more positively than those who hadn't had to undergo the humiliating initiation. So, not only do groups want to test you, but they want you to value your membership.

Makes sense.

Is it not true that some of the tightest groups around have an initiation of some kind??

College: Fraternities and Sororities are very tight groups. They have initiation through tests, milestones, and achievements that everyone must do before they're a member. (I'm only referring to constructive achievements by the way, not the childish/dangerous things... those don't help anyone.)

Careers: Joining a big league investment firm is valued membership. But getting into one of them only comes after running a rigorous gauntlet. (Watch The Pursuit of Happyness.)

Brands: American Express membership is a sought-after achievement. They have their own "initiation" through strict qualifying terms that everyone must pass in order to join.

Think for a bit... you can make a nice list of examples...

But one thing sure is true: the strongest company cultures most often exist at places that have the toughest standards. Because only through collective achievement of tough standards do group members form tight, mutually-respected bonds.

So if organizations really want to build a strong group culture, perhaps they should have some sort of initiation for all new employees, versus just showing them where the coffee is on the first day and then rushing them into a meeting.

Learning from mcgarrybowen

If you were reading Adweek last week, perhaps you came across the news that Kraft Miracle Whip shifted creative duties to mcgarrybowen in NY. I say "perhaps" because I find that in my travels many people aren't very familiar with this shop yet. Which is odd to me. Mcgarry and team have quietly built a pretty amazing agency in less than five years.

First off, the work is solid: Entertaining, motivating and easy-to-understand.

Second, the mcgarrybowen client list is amazing. Consider: Verizon, Kraft, Disney, Marriott, Crayola, The Wall Street Journal, Reebok, Chevron and Chase. All gathered since 2002. And I don't recall them publicly losing anything either...

Our industry is filled with talented people trying to start and build great agencies. What can we learn from the success of mcgarrybowen???  Wait a while.

Most agencies are created by a couple of execs who have 15 or so years in the industry and then strike out on their own--usually out of frustration or because they have an opportunity with one large client. That isn't what happened with mcgarrybowen.

John McGarry retired from Young & Rubicam as Chairman/CEO and THEN started the agency. Stewart Owen, one of the other founders, was Vice Chairman of Landor before he joined John. And Gordon Bowen has, by my count, over thirty years of industry creative success. Having guys like that pitch your business carries all the excitement of going with a start-up, with minimal perceived risk.

The connections they have run deeper than most. Their brand projects confidence. They're winning most accounts without reviews. Just a great effort all the way around that, in my opinion, hasn't received the proper ink deserved.

Work Ethic

Today it was announced by Adweek that Crispin, Porter + Bogusky landed creative duties on Open from American Express. A moment of respect and praise for CP+B please. I think the industry agrees that Ogilvy has done great things with that account ever since David himself won it back in 1962. That must have been a dogfight.

I've been waiting for the appropriate moment to say something about Crispin... Lots has been written regarding their innovative use of media, their philosophy about what advertising is, and their creative success in general. But what I admire about CP+B most is their work ethic.

I've never worked there, but I can feel it from 1,000 miles away. Like many of us, I've heard stories. And reading their employee handbook confirms this. (It's great, and if you haven't seen it, go to their site.) I believe the thing that sets Crispin apart is that they will simply out work you. Stay up all night. Spend the weekend. Work over Christmas. Do whatever it takes to find the solution. I don't want to take anything away from whatever creative ideas they brought to AmEx Open (which I'm guessing were great), but I'm betting they wanted it more and worked harder to get it.

These days everyone wants to know things like: Is viral better than TV? Should we be blogging? Podcasting? Using bluetooth messaging? The answer: Probably all of it. But that's not what agencies and marketers want to hear, because it means more time and more work. Pat Meeley and I have discussed this in depth: There is no magic marketing bullet. You want to be the best? Work harder. Stay later. Redo things. Come in on Sunday morning.

I worked at Deutsch from 1997 - 2003 and was fortunate to experience the fantastic ride they had as five time "Agency of the Year" from Adweek and AdAge. A big part of that success was that no one worked as hard as we did. The team was working all the time, and the success that came from that was awesome. The folks at CP+B have been experiencing that for a few years and that energy and confidence and pride probably won't come around again.

Advertising history says that it won't last forever for Crispin... but it also doesn't say when it will end. So enjoy it, because when you look back after it's all over, I promise, from a career perspective, it will be worth it.

Cheers.