Content without a brief
When I sat down to write “content will kill your agencies” I had a very clear view of what content is and, obviously, why it will kill the agency you work for and interestingly enough after posting I spotted a whole bunch of other posts that relate in some way to content or to the future of the advertising industry and agencies (a full link list can be found at the bottom of this post).
For me, the kind of content that will kill your agency is the kind of content that happens without a brief - nobody has told you or the so called business development people in your agency that they would like to have a specific piece of content.
I’ve gone on record (albeit in German during one of the werbeblogger late night podcasts) and said that every single agency, regardless of size, is capable of producing content that would challenge anything that is currently on the market; whether that be film, television, literature, online, radio, games or events. The skills, ideas and creativity of the people that work within the agencies is, however, being wasted by the people running them and a business model that is increasingly neither meeting the needs of “consumers” nor those of the businesses that are their clients.
The kind of content that will kill your agency is briefless content. It will kill your agency because nobody is telling you what to do and you won’t have a mandate to do it. You will have to work it all out for yourselves. It will kill your agency because it will be bespoke, unique and without comparison. You will have to fight harder for it, harder than you fight for stuff now.
It will kill your agency because it’s not advertising, at least not as we know it today.
Here as promised are some other posts covering similar stuff. Well worth a read:
- Kris Hoet - “where is agency 2.0“
- Faris Yakob - “Logocentrism“
- Richard Huntigton - “The death of serendipity“
- Sean Howard - “Digital in context of experience“
- David Armano - “A Moment of Truth for Digital Agencies“
- Valeria Maltoni - “If I Were an Agency Today” (check the comments on this post; Bob Pearson of Dell gives some insight into the recent Dell/WPP venture)
- AdPulp/David Burn - “Considering Content“
UPDATE: I’m putting related posts into something that I’m calling “The Content Manifesto“. There is some new stuff if there.
If you think that others might been interested in this would you be so kind as to Stumble it?
<
This work is licensed under
Creative Commons
Rob Mortimer
Some nice clarification and some equally good points there.
Dec 11th, 2007
The Kaiser
Rob - cheers. I’d be interested to hear how you would build on this. How could you see something like this working?
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Thanks
Briefless content is a risk that requires good creative and planning staff (in ad agency staff formats at least) to get away with. People who can think totally neutrally whilst maintaining the brand ideas and beliefs.
I can’t see many agencies going for briefless, as there is so much scope as to hinder work. But what I think will work is ‘briefer brief content’, where the basic outline is there but there is much further content and media freedom.
The idea of teams thinking for themselves is good though. As long as there is a proper process to ensure quality and that communication matches the brand.
I hope that makes sense, it did as I thought it..!
Dec 11th, 2007
The Kaiser
Rob - an agency, running it’s current model can’t go this way, that’s why content would kill it. It would need to rebuild itself, rebuild and realign. Good stuff Mortimer.
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I think some agencies could make that shift, it has many parallels to the ‘digital’ shift over recent years. Some (Maybe your Mother’s, Naked’s, WK’s etc) could cope and remould. While the others would probably just open dedicated ‘briefless shops’ that would end up being absorbed back into the company once it has reorganised its way of working.
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Also:
Digital has often been treated as briefless, or certainly brieferbrief; particularly web content aimed as ‘viral’. Hence the creative variety digital only work has.
As far as big agencies go, their ability to make this change would depend on just how creatively led they really are, and how well their planners and account managers can adjustinto new roles.
Dec 11th, 2007
The Kaiser
Interesting point (re: Mother, W+K etc.) but I’m not sure I would agree. Have a look at this post from back in July:
http://theidesofmarch.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/objective-number-9/
Check the comments, especially from Neil and John.
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I get what you mean. Although I do think some agencies are capable of change, a few years ago many people thought big agencies would never ‘get’ digital or integrated comms. Many still don’t, but the change is slowly happening.
Never underestimate the ability of companies to change when money is at stake!
Dec 11th, 2007
The Kaiser
You trying to get yourself into Campaign again Mortimer
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Not really. I was enjoying a debate with my favourite AngloDeutsche Head of state.
It was funny last week though, when I wrote my Carling ad review I looked back at it and rephrased a couple of the comments into nice quotable pieces…and lo and behold one of them ends up in Campaign!
I wonder what the record is for being mentioned in Campaign without an ad or marketing job? I’m up to four now..!
Do you agree about the similarity to digital though Herr Kaiser?
Dec 11th, 2007
The Kaiser
If you mean I think that some big agencies are slowly “getting” digital then no. No I don’t.
But then I dealt with all that here:
http://www.thekaiser-edition.com/topics/if-i-were-a-client-today/
Dec 11th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I’d certainly agree that several of the big agencies seem to still be waaay back on digital. But agencies like TBWA have made progress (their Quashqai campaign was well integrated, and had a good online strategy).
Even Ogilvy are making steps, when I went there they kept talking about bringing in people who better understand digital and the like. Tribal DDB are doing decent stuff as well.
And blast, I need to remember to write campaign with no capital…
Dec 11th, 2007
neilperkin
I’m afraid I have more faith in (some) agencies ability to change and (some) people within those agencies to drive that change. Perhaps the agency that will pioneer the new approach that is needed hasn’t been launched yet (perhaps some of the plannersphere should get together and do it?).
I’m not really sure I fully understand what you mean here but I do believe that there will always be a place for good authored, designed, directed and even edited content and those authors, designers, directors and editors will always be working with some kind of an objective, and interpretation of that objective in mind. Is that not still a brief of sorts? Guess this means I’m with Rob on this one.
Dec 12th, 2007
Colin
Just what exactly is the point of an advertising agency if it doesn’t do any advertising? That’s what advertising agencies do!!!!!
And if you don’t have a brief then you don’t have a client which means you don’t earn any money. And that it really bad business practise!!!
@Neil
Planners couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery let alone set up a brand new agency idea! Don’t make me laugh.
Rubbish all of it.
Dec 12th, 2007
The Kaiser
Neil - how are you? Good to have you on the new blog. I maybe should have been clearer on this - what I meant is a “client brief” - a purchase order if you wish. Both Rob M and yourself make valid points, but I think that if you really take a good long hard look at some of those agencies there is nothing really new being done.
Coln - That’s my point Colin. They wouldn’t be advertising agencies anymore. And as for your reply to Neil, I think I’ll leave the planners to argue their corner.
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Some of the planners I know are capable of organising a piss up in a rehab clinic. You clearly aren’t working with any of the cream there Colin.
Dec 12th, 2007
Colin
a) I seriously doubt that.
b) you have no idea where I work. Believe me it would surprise you.
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
a) No seriously, and one of them doesn’t even drink..!
b) Well clearly I don’t, it was just a generalising comment to counter your generalising comment!
I would be interested to know though, I know Mother don’t like planners…but otherwise no idea.
When I (finally) get into planning I will organising a big piss up in a brewery and make sure you have the first invite Colin
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
organise**
Dec 12th, 2007
NP
A very good debate. But brief is such a dirty word. It can be prescriptive ‘do it this way’ or it can be agenda. One is springboard, one is straight jacket.
You’re still trying to achieve SOMETHING. It’s just that the very process of diamond hard briefs sucks out any chance of anything interesting happening.
Task based briefs that set out what needs to be achieved and set the ball rolling are fine, briefs about having ideas, not putting things into media silos. Surely the rest of of is organised chaos?
And by the way, I get a bit sick of hip young gunslingers ‘inventing’ new ways of doing this job. Does Cadburys Gorilla really make less sense than honey monster or the Hoffmeister bear? Is McCain doing musicals anything other than product placement?
30 years ago no one wanted to know about TV ads. They managed that fine.
Dec 12th, 2007
The Kaiser
You calling me a “hip young gunslinger” NP?
Dec 12th, 2007
NP
You wish
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I think the essence of this idea is that briefs will become more about agenda than rigidity, and whether ad agencies will be able to make the transition to a more fluid form of communication.
Whether that will happen considering many clients (so I hear) are reluctant to offer much creative freedom; I don’t know. But the idea is a fascinating one.
Regards to Gorilla/Webster comparison; I don’t think Gorilla is as good as those (for a start the Gorilla has no real characterisation, its just a musical Gorilla) but I agree with your point.
TV, Digital, Interactive, Content… its all change, its always changing.
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I hope you weren’t referring to me…
Dec 12th, 2007
The Kaiser
NP, it would seem, is in a fiesty mood again today. Excellent.
Rob M - I’ve deliberatly left clients out of the equation up untill now because as far as I’m concerned agencies use the “I can’t do that because my client is (was) such an arse” argument to either cover up their general lack of interest, the quality of their staff or the nonsense that agency senior management has promised the client in the first place (see general quality of staff).
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
I agree its an excuse. But the client pays the money, so really its down to them (or the agency to persuade them) to allow it; and why would the agency want to persuade them to do something outside their realm?
NP is great in fiesty mode.
Dec 12th, 2007
The Kaiser
Now, Mr Mortimer, we’re getting somewhere.
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Indeed. Again its similar to digital 5 years ago; “Should we have a web presence for this campaign?”
A: If agency has digital capabilities - Yes!
B: If agency has no digital capabilities - No!
Dec 12th, 2007
NP
Sorry Rob, but it’s not always like that. It’s true that some clients just prescribe and insist on getting what they asked for, but much of that can be down to be what they’re used to. And guess who’s to blame for that?
Ad agencies have lost their place at the top table, to business consultancies and poxy brand consultancies who never have to execute a damned thing, and all because they act like spoilt kids when their lovely japanese inspired film gets knocked back.
On the other hand. many agencies are happy to take a fast buck and then blame the client for asking for the wrong thing…..or presenting the right stuff very, very badly. No one is going to react well to being told, “You were wrong stupid, this is what you should do”, but that’s what many patronising Soho boys do.
You’d be amazed what respectful, reasoned, well thought out debate can produce. Great work needs a purpose, a reason for being as it is. And sometimes Michaeal Winner being a prat IS the right thing to do.
Clients will always revert back to a comfort zone, so would I if my neck, or house was on the line. The further you go with the work (if it’s appropriate) and you get pulled back, the more you’ll end up ahead. And the more it’s grounded in real commercial reasoning, the better. It’s just that sometimes the most commercial thing to do is to be interesting…….and that needs proving.
Dec 12th, 2007
Rob Mortimer
Oh I agree absolutely. As I said, its probably down to the agency failing to persuade (or not wanting to persuade) them a more creative answer is right; and mostly it seems, for the reasons you give.
Your experience with sofa’s will hold you in good stead NP; because you have had to battle for creative ideas.
This is why I admire Rob C and the gang; they put the debate there. They force their way onto that top table by being insightful and relevent; and they don’t act like brats when they lose… they go away and come back stronger.
Its hard to know everything that goes on from outside the industry, but thats certainly how it appears to me.
Dec 12th, 2007
Gavin Heaton
Thought I would chime in and wave the business consultancies flag (again) … and agree with the Northern Planner.
On the client side of the equation there is much complaining that Marketing don’t get a seat at the Boardroom table. They don’t get that seat because they don’t add value to the business strategy. In their absence, business consultancies have been beavering away understanding and testing the linkage between brands, marketing, ROI and the balance sheet. When they crack this nut — when they are able to identify and measure the impact that brand/marketing/advertising work has on the strategic value of the company, then they will be unbeatable.
Not only do they have the resources to build new delivery capabilities, they have the deep pockets and eagle eyes that will allow them to pick and choose the very best creative and planning talent available. And I am sure there will be no shortage of takers.
How does this fit within a “briefless” environment? Easily … consultants are already used to working this way. They draw upon models, best practices and processes. They back them up with analytics tools and financial modelling. And they are used to discussing and selling their plans to the CEO and the board.
Will this really happen? Hard to say … but it will only have to happen to one brand and one agency and it will change the agencyworld as we know it.
Dec 12th, 2007
Gavin Heaton
Good example.
http://www.beingpeterkim.com/2007/12/5-year-old-kill.html
Dec 13th, 2007
Reply to “Content without a brief”