An advertising
agency in
Albuquerque,
New Mexico.

• About 3
• Philosophy
• Blog
• Toybox
• Contact Us

Portfolio

Categories Print Radio Outdoor Ambient Internet Collateral ID Packages Logos Posters Promotional Environment TV Direct Mail

Thing of the Week Archives

• Leaders
• News
• Careers

In the advertising world, what goes on in media research doesn’t always affect creative circles – but Nielsen’s new TV commercial ratings are causing quite a buzz. Up until now, there were TV program ratings – we knew how many people watched Ugly Betty. However, soon we’ll know how many people tuned into the commercial breaks during Ugly Betty - and soon after that, Nielsen will tell us how many people saw each commercial within the breaks.

The breakthrough benefit for agency media planners and their clients is a more accurate assessment of actual value and a likely economic advantage. We finally have the negotiating leverage to stop paying for restless eyeballs that zap out during commercial breaks. TV sellers are understandably nervous.

Creative departments, though, are a bit more cautious. Clients hungry for accountability may perceive the new data as a black and white report card on each piece of creative. There is a natural attraction to data-based rationale whether it’s out of genuine interest to make better decisions or relief that the stake in the ground no longer has to be personal judgment. This new research capability may be a revival for the value of great creative. Demonstrating one and for all that people are more likely to tune in when the message is relevant, meaningful and (dare we say) entertaining. As opposed to the classic ad formula of screaming features and prices at the viewer.

But we can’t ask this new data to do more than its share of heavy lifting. When all is said and done, there will still be the age-old question about who gets the credit and who gets the blame: does a commercial rating reflect the spot’s appeal, or its position in the break within a well-targeted program? Or, did viewers simply zap out to grab breaking news on CNN? And to that point, can any research capture the countless forces that affect how well a message is received, such as whether someone was distracted by kids or dogs at the time of exposure? Maybe some day, but not quite yet.

It’s important to embrace Nielsen’s progress as key input, but it should not serve stand-alone as rationale for multifaceted decisions that are still better made with good old collaboration and human judgment.

 

For media people, few things inspire both love and hate as much as research.
By nature, we are numbers freaks. We love the comfort of turning off the
world, engaging our iPods and digging into the gritty research analysis.
It’s like heaven.

But research is not always roses and chocolate. Consider Arbitron’s outdated system of measuring radio listening. Have you ever seen the completed diaries people keep? It’s no wonder the results sometimes seem inconsistent. Or it could be the “sample size not reliable” message that is returned when you get too aggressive with your inquiry – such as trying to better understand a Harley owner by asking for his preferred brand of watch or cologne. The problem with looking for answers in research is that most of the time the answer just doesn’t “feel” right.

So each day we arrive at a fork in our planning path: Do we rely solely on research, be it good or bad? Do we simply choose the path that can be supported by data? This is the most common choice for many. And, if the path is questioned, they have the standard answer waiting in their hip pocket, “but the data can’t get that specific” or “it’s not proven.”

A solid media planner will consider the research, absorb it, but never look to find the answers in it. Real success (and a little risk) comes when we step out of our data-centric comfort zone. Rather than fall back on what is defined, why not call up an informed gut instinct based on our experience and knowledge, rather than lean on flawed or retro-fitted numbers. Real strategy comes from the gut, not from spreadsheets.

All great planners feel the pull of the data and then take it to the next level, sometimes living outside the comfort zone. It frees us to be creative and it always leads to smarter campaigns for our clients. (Not to mention, it’s way more challenging and fun.)

In the end, successful communications don’t evolve from Scarborough runs or focus groups; they result from a natural curiosity, a tolerance for ambiguity, the courage to take a calculated risk. So, appreciate the guidance and insight that can sometimes be found in research. And then walk away and trust yourself to create the answers.

 

One thing we've noticed as we've adopted a collaborative working model is how important it is to be equals with the people we're working with, both internally and externally, when it comes to ideas. It’s freeing to push the historical agency (and client) job titles aside and just share ideas.

We believe the best idea wins, no matter where it comes from. Art directors can come up with killer headline campaigns. Copywriters may conceive brilliant executions for a corporate identity package. A media planner can generate the freshest of guerrilla ideas. And yes, even clients and account executives may concept a wonderful interactive idea. We all have our traditional responsibilities to assume on a given assignment. And certainly within each specialty, experience and wisdom usually prevail, but it's fun to let go of job functions and just think about the challenge at hand. The latest fad of consumer-generated advertising takes this idea even further.

When everyone works together from and toward the same place, ideas seem to flourish. No hidden agendas and an almost blatant disregard for old-school “territories” is the direction that is going to take advertising into the next phase. The “greatideascomefrommanydirections” era of advertising. How has collaboration changed the way you work?

 

© 2008 3 Advertising LLC, a full-service advertising agency in Albuquerque, New Mexico.