)
As the New Year approaches and clients and their agencies gear up to assess their creative output in the year that was and plan for future, let me ask a simple question. Has the joy gone out of advertising? Has the spontaneity all but disappeared? When was the last time an agency went into a client meeting, presented a script and walked out to meet with potential directors? Well, it still happens, but chances are that more often than not, several additional stages intervene. No, I am not talking about the client's super boss or his global boss or his ultimate boss, his wife.
With the growth of marketing research culture, clients across industries are sacrificing their own gut instinct at the altar of pre-test research. The research culture is also encouraged by CEOs who ask their CMOs, "Did you research the campaign?" The film script that is loved by all in the room is often put through the wringer called pre-test. It sometimes comes out unscathed, but very often it comes out badly bruised. When the script comes out bruised, some clients, ably supported by strong willed agency executives and creative, are willing to ignore the negative comments, and go with their gut.
At times, the script gets mutilated, distorted and ends up looking like what the cat brought home.
Jonathan Harries, the world wide creative director of FCB even wrote a very engaging article on the need of agency creatives to develop the art of navigating the shark infested waters of pre-testing. He called this: "Familiarity With a Twist." Harries argued that to be successful agencies need to embrace the nuances of pre-test procedures, instead of fighting them blindly. The first step is to understand the process and figure out how to ensure the script scores. Then comes the art of writing a story that is engaging but has the ability to beat the test norms.
Pre-test of ads used to be a phenomenon that was prevalent and mandated by some multinational clients, thanks to global diktats. But over the last five years we are seeing the pre-test norm spreading across industries and client organisations. Sometimes they play a role in agency selection as well, strangely.
Am I a rabid 'anti-pre-test' wala? Do I believe that any form of pre-test is bad for creativity? Not at all.
The next key imperative is to then see if the findings of the research correlate with the gut reaction of the marketing team. If it is way out of line, then there is something wrong. Third, the agency and the client team need to develop a learning curve on what research said and what really happened when the ad ran in media. Finally, smart marketing companies will use these research procedures to improve the decision making of their marketing executives.
A smart marketing professional is like a sponge. He is observing all that is happening around him and makes constant market visits to understand the market landscape. Using new research methods like ethnographic research, he is also trying to understand the changing consumer attitudes. All this is brought to bear when they sit to discuss an ad campaign. Companies are sacrificing all this if they blindly follow a research process.
The middle ground is to use a bit of both. Use research to help develop a point of view and figure out which moment in the ad will spark consumer interest.
But, finally, let the decision be left to the collective acumen of the marketing team. We are now hearing of neuro-research, where EEGs are used to map the brain of the consumer when they are seeing an ad. Again, use it for the same purpose as you use pre-test. But take the final call based on your own gut feel. Advertising is part science, part art. Let us keep it that way.
MG Parameswaran
Member, Management Board, FCB Ulka Advertising Group
Member, Management Board, FCB Ulka Advertising Group
