Coming to terms with mediocrity.
I have a feeling that this post may upset some people. Here we go.
Do you remember desktop publishing - or DTP? It used to be a rather important part of the creative services supply chain; never particularly glamorous (not quite “design” and never quite “creative”), but still very important for the overall process of getting stuff done.
DTP is dead.
CorelDraw! killed desktop publishing by democratising the technology (low cost and mass availability) - and Art Directors killed desktop publishing because agency management, hell bent of reducing costs and headcount demanded it of them (some actually thought they could do it too).
If you work in the creative department of an advertising agency in 2008 you will be hard pushed to find either a member of your team who can remember the old process or somebody who can handle a pencil and can draw - but I bet everyone is pretty savvy with a Mac, Photoshop, Quark and InDesign.
Suddenly everyone with a computer, a mouse and a piece of software could “creative” stuff, which is morally superb - but has proven to be, functionally and qualitatively speaking, an absolute bloody nightmare and has created what Walter Gropius called an “art-proletariat” - a mass a people misled into believing that just because, they had secured a place in art education (whether it be painting, architecture, design or sculpture), that they had all the tools needed to be artists - and were somehow muddying the waters of creativity. Some of you may think that that sounds pretty elitist, and maybe it is - but I would encourage you to talk to the people who run design or pre-press businesses about the quality of the people being churned out of design schools (both private and public).
We expect mediocre - and, 9,9 times out of 10 that’s exactly what we get.
It has thus become incredibly hard to validate and receive remuneration for excellence in design because the expectations and skills of the people involved in the creative supply chain (both in terms of buying, producing and selling) have become incredibly meager - and the good people suffer.
There are so many reasons why the advertising industry is doomed. Whether it be corruption, poor management, the overall quality of the client and the overall quality of the agency staff the advertising industry really is in a dreadful state. And now, much as with DTP all those years ago, everybody is at it - the new bread of “art-proletariat” or “Z-Listers” are just getting on and doing stuff that traditionally fell in the realm of the creative expert - leaving the experts looking a little slow, sluggish, hugely expensive and not particularly expert anymore.
Syndrome invented a whole bunch of tools that he wanted to sell to the world so that everybody could be a super hero. His thinking being, that by giving every “normal” person on the planet “super powers” there would be no further requirement for super heroes. Everybody would be super.
The Internet is slowly, but surely canceling out the super powers of the advertising industry because it’s helping the mundane mediocrity of everybody become super. The advertising industry in turn is loosing one skill after the other. It can’t possibly fight on these terms because, secretly, it’s done a deal with the devil and now looks more like a business consultancy industry - but that is an industry that is moving in on the advertising patch too.
It is a sad day, when an industry that once purported to be a creative industry hungers for a “new model of remuneration” as the only way to save itself. With companies such as Accenture, RR Donnelley and Williams Lea moving into the advertising, creative and communications arena a new remuneration model won’t solve or save anything because these businesses talk both the language of the procurement director and the share holder (transparency, savings, cost reduction, KPI’s, SLA’s etc.)
UPDATE: As I say in the comments of this post why should you pay for exceptional when all you and your business want is average? - and that business consultancies are exceptional at being just that - average.
(click here for further reading that tastes like Mr. Seth Godin.)
Are these companies qualified to produce “creative” work? Was a company that made wire baskets qualified and is it surprising that WPP considered buying one of the business consultancies mentioned above back in 2004?
And that’s why I think all of this talk about content killing your advertising agency and the content manifesto is important, because as far as I can see it is the only place for a creative industry to go.
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 @ Cynic
As you know - this has been a real issue for me recently and I have to write something about it - but whether it’ll even be half as good as this is open to debate.
Bring back more thinking into the creative process … but then I could say the same for planning
Jan 9th, 2008
The Kaiser
You SHOULD say the same for planning.
Jan 9th, 2008
Charles Frith
I can’t believe you’ve just written this. Its so relevant to an experience I’ve just had and you’ve written it far better than I ever could have. I briefed a team recently, nobody would be able to figure out who or where or why, so I don’t mind sharing it. I finally received the digital “creative”. I pushed and pushed hard and finally came to the conclusion that there was no creative idea. The reality of seeing acres of flashy graphics are considered a ‘creative’ idea is a realization that attention grabbing visuals are now considered a creative idea.
To be fair to WPP they pay me and I’m such a creative luvvy. You know it baby.
Jan 9th, 2008
lauren
greetings earthling, i am your blog-post in human form!
i’m a qualified graphic pre-press operator. i left the industry because the craft was being squeezed out of it and i was just going to be a glorified typist who knew the difference between postscript 1 & 2 and could tell you what trapping, imposition and a UV varnish was. i decided that i needed to make stuff instead and went off to do a fine arts course, generating content left right and centre. now i guess i’m part of the art-proletariat too.. ha!
Jan 9th, 2008
Carolyn
I know I can trust the “creative” process a creative director will go through when he/she brings a black pentel and a layout pad to a meeting with me and draws concepts and thoughts as we talk. Maybe it’s the ex-designer in me but I want to see workings and thought process in the beginning as a client. Maybe I just like keeping it old school.
Jan 9th, 2008
The Kaiser
Lauren - I think, largely - with very few exceptions, we all belong to the Z-List. In a couple of years the Z-list will become the online equivalent of the middle class.
Charles - I think what you’re experiencing at the minute is incredibly interesting and you need to write more about this kind of stuff. A new market (which is ancient) doing old market stuff. It’s such a shame. What a waste.
Carolyn - ah, the voice of the client. Old school - finding comfort in the “aura” of expertise. This is an interesting point and it depends on the kind of expertise you’re looking for (and what you are prepared to pay for it).
This is where business consultancies come into the picture. Why pay for exceptional when all you and your company (not you in particular Carolyn) only “require” average. A good average - but average none the less. Business Consultancies are exceptional at average.
Jan 9th, 2008
John Dodds
Reminds me of the idea that while everybody has a voice and is entitled to an opinion, the internet has given everyone a microphone which amplifies both their opinion’s reach and their belief in it.
I think the problem is partly a semantic one - people keep telling me that most (i.e. average) products are good enough and yet they really aren’t because if they were good enough we would be satisfied rather than irritated by the things that go wrong or aren’t included.
The “average” we require is not the “average” that is delivered. Indeed the average we require is in fact exceptional - not mind-blowingly bleeding-edge sensational just better than the vast majority of sub standard, advertising-puffed stuff out there.
Jan 9th, 2008
The Kaiser
It is impossible to create exceptional work that both satisfies procurement and the shareholder - to do that you need to meet quarterly targets (sales targets, savings targets) exceptional is about long term - “average” meets immediate needs of the bookkeeper. Average is the junk food of the bookkeeper.
Creative bookkeepers tend to end up in jail.
Jan 9th, 2008
Rob Mortimer
Hard to come up with something worthy of following that up. I still disagree that advertising is doomed per se, but in its current shape and form maybe.
Jan 9th, 2008
John Dodds
Exceptional only has to better than the rest - it doesn’t have to be spectacular.
Jan 9th, 2008
Valeria Maltoni
I would love to see exceptional! I would love to see better, even. Alas, all I get is mediocre dressed up as “trying to understand your situation” when all it is is risk management. Sad, really.
Jan 10th, 2008
Gavin Heaton
Unfortunately this problem doesn’t start with “business” or “brands”. That is where it reaches its mediocre zenith. But the problems are molded and shaped in the education sector. You know this Kaiser.
Try hiring a smart, inquisitive, lateral thinker these days. Try finding a graduate who doesn’t need to be spoon fed, or one that doesn’t think that they can walk into a six figure salary and corner office on day 1. When we allow our universities to churn out mediocre, we end up with the “talent” we deserve. And that is a poor indictment on us and the indiscriminate care that we hold for our future.
Jan 10th, 2008
lauren
gavin, i’m almost inclined to agree, but really, if the industry wanted that kind of graduate, it would get it. the reality it is that advertising isn’t actually looking for lateral thinking. they’re looking for the mediocre graduate, who will fit into a price bracket, a cultural fit and knows follow a set process from day one. and i only know this because all the smart, intelligent, young, lateral thinkers (who didn’t take Advertising Blowjobs 101) are either unemployed or in other industries, where they can use their brains AND still go to bed with a clear conscience.
Jan 10th, 2008
Rob @ Cynic
Average didn’t always used to be bad.
It used to represent the marriage of value and performance [and/or quality] now it’s just the lowest common denominator.
It used to be a challenge to be exceptional. Now it’s just getting a biscuit with your fucking coffee.
Jan 10th, 2008
Seb
Luvvy, as always I agree and disagree. Here and there, Now and then.
Most points are absolutely right and from my point of view should be common both accepted and feared.
The big problem is that most agencies and people who work for them have a very limited namely a short-term view on their business, culture, career and whatever they do. Furthermore they subordinate culture to business goals and relationships. What is a mistake because it’s the culture that makes agencies stand out from other creative agencies and business consultancies. What I think I learnt from my former agencies and from walking through the world with an open mind is that culture is the most important and inevitable property an agency has. It will influence the work, the people and consequently their business success.
But it’s not easy to grow and maintain a certain culture that both attracts exceptional thinkers and clients. It takes time, effort and some defeats form time to time. Above all it takes long or at least mid-term thinking as it won’t pay off instantly.
From my background in German advertising I can say that there is not one single agency with that a positive, exceptional culture. Of course there are cultures but as I said they are subordinate to business goals or only exist to tell clients “we have a culture. nice, isn’t it?”
Unfortunately this not only effects the agency but the industry and people breaking into or working in this industry as well. Most junior teams I know or happened to work with are not focussed on doing brilliant work on client briefs but for awards. Exceptional work from time to time. Valuable short-time (ranking, bonus, salary, title) but worthless long-term. No wonder clients don’t respect agencies as a partner anymore but see them as a service provider. They pump unbelievable amounts of money and time into spec ads and awards shows while doing mediocre or average work on actual business.
The industry simply forgot and betrayed its own right to exist.
Let’s take this a bit further. Creative teams today learn one benchmark for their work. The question: Is it creative enough? Is the idea unusual enough? Don’t forget, we are talking solely about ad ideas.
Now when these teams happen to become senior and work on business problems they try to solve it this way. Creative advertising ideas. It’s what they learnt was important to win awards and that’s what they want to achieve with client work (it’s an accolade for creatives to win with real work. ironic, isn’t it?). Now the client wants to solve a business problem and as the agency presents him advertising ideas he will focus on solving his problem with the ideas offered what consequently will end up in mediocre advertising (I am shortening this progress).
And here is where we come to your content thingy. I am not sure if content is the right word but it’s definitely the right directions. But before we can do that we need a culture that encourages young creative people to not work for awards but try to find new and exceptional ways to solve business problems. But to do that it’s inevitable to understand and know the client’s business as good as independent films from Scandinavia.
So for god’s sake:
Grow a culture.
Don’t judge it buy business goals.
Take care of how you educate your people.
Don’t make awards your goal because as Paul Arden said they are a measure of mediocrity found by a group of people to figure out on what work they can all agree on. Exceptional work most times is something not everybody will like.
Does all this make any sense? Somehow?
Jan 10th, 2008
The Kaiser
Seb - I’m not sure what you mean by: “don’t judge it by business goals”. Could you explain what you mean by that?
Jan 10th, 2008
Charles Frith
There’s always room for adequate. Its quite acceptable for a Swedish wife to inquire about the meal she cooked for her husband and for him to respond. It was adequate darling (in Swedish of course) with no one offended in the slightest. I’m not making this up!
Jan 10th, 2008
Seb
With “don’t judge it by business goals” I mean that you should not have an agency culture only for the sake of it or to attract certain clients.
Most agencies reduce their philosophy or culture to a new business tool. For example Jung von Matt, Germany’s most awarded agency, state the Trojan Horse philosophy and lines like “we stay hungry” and “we are the idea power plant” are an integral part of their culture. It’s not focussed on the most evident part (their people) but a blatant try to attract clients. The idea is that the best work will attract money and people.
Only they forget that the best work can only be done by people who work in a certain environment that thrives their creativity. So an agency should concentrate on providing an environment in which these people can do the best work of their life that will attract money and other brilliant people.
Maybe I should not say “don’t judge it by business goals” but “don’t abuse it as a new business tool.
Jan 10th, 2008
Seb
Anyway it’s just one of the many mistakes and wrong directions agencies are up to.
But it only makes the few brilliant agencies (like Droga5, W+K, CP+B, Anomaly, Naked, Mother, Poke…) shine brighter.
Jan 10th, 2008
Brett
What if the quality of mediocrity is higher than ever and due to ubiquity of what we do it’s more competitive than ever to be truly great and original? Maybe we’ve entered a phase of parity where anyone can do great on any day, but need to apply themselves, have some talent and a bit of luck. For a lateral example in North America leagues like NFL (american football) and NHL (hockey) have entered a state where one or two teams are at the top year over year, but for the rest of the league a team can go from the bottom to the top and vice versa in only one or two seasons. Whereas it used to take decades.
That said, I do believe that due to financial pressures, too often when there are opportunities to be great, they get watered down by short terms financial thinking or it simply takes too much effort to go that last big leap to be great.
Hopefully, the great benefit user controlled media will give us is that mediocrity gets tuned out, while great gets more tuned in. And as corporate profits wane and cost cutting and imitation no longer deliver financial results a re-embracement of innovation and creativity return. Or at least that’s what I’m hoping.
Jan 10th, 2008
Reply to “Coming to terms with mediocrity.”