An interesting twitter debate kicked off earlier today over the merits of a John Steele quote as tweeted by Dave Trott.
"It's not a planner's job to have ideas, rather to create an environment where others can have them." - John Steele
Followed by Mark Hancock (Holycow) responding to say he agreed that planners need to foster an environment, but that the stimulus planners give to creatives usually comes as an idea. W+K's official account also tweeted that they'd rather have people who create ideas across the board, from planning to HR. I've yet to see any response from Dave Trott, but I think it will be worth reading if he does.
I find this a fascinating topic, because while in many respects it feels like a case of semantics, it comes down to one key point for me:
If a brief is devoid of ideas, how is is likely to inspire creatives?
We can't exactly claim that strategy isn't full of ideas. If a strategy has no ideas, we'll just end up with boring cliche'd briefs that will nudge the creatives towards limited ideas.
If people across the agency are creating ideas, it helps to foster people working together better. Not only that if creatives see that the people around them have the capability to generate ideas then it must give them more confidence that the briefs and development around them are well thought out, and appreciate how they are going to produce ideas.
Personally I have to agree with the tweet from W+K. If you run a creative business, everything that you produce is based upon ideas. Strategic ideas to develop great briefs and real useful insights, creative ideas to bring the strategy to life, account handling ideas to ensure everything runs smoothly and efficiently. Why on earth would you not want anyone in that team to have ideas, to share them and create a culture that works together to create a whole that is massively beyond the sum of the parts. In fact if you look at the difference between the best and the worst creative organisations, I bet one of the key differences you will see is their openness to ideas and the culture of collective creativity that it can help to foster.
Of course John isn't bad mouthing ideas, and I doubt he means planners shouldn't have ideas, just that this shouldn't be the key thing we do. However I think ideas are such an intrinsic part of what we do, that we cannot possibly be great planners without generating ideas.
As I've said before, I am a firm believer that creativity comes from anywhere, and that while we are separated as planner, creatives and account handlers for a reason, that doesn't mean that we are incapable of ideas or feedback on those other areas. We inherently have to understand each others' positions to produce the best work. A planner should accept that a creative might have a great strategic idea, just as a planner might have a great creative idea. In a football team no one says to a defender "You should not score goals", you make sure they do their job of defending, but if they turn up and score, you applaud them for their cross team effort, just as you would a striker who makes a key tackle in the penalty area. (Sorry for the football metaphor, it seemed apt.)
I think perhaps the two things are very closely linked. Fostering an environment that encourages ideas is partly done by having ideas yourself. To cut off yourself from having ideas is to stifle any atmosphere of sharing and generation that you try to create. If you want to foster a relaxed culture, you shouldn't turn up in suit and tie every day, you have to live the culture you are trying to create.
I've seen John Steele present his core thoughts at work, and he is a compelling speaker. I don't want this to come across as a criticism of his work, because as we know, context is everything, and this is a quote out of context and without substantiation. I do think it's an interesting topic to debate further though.
Showing posts with label planners. Show all posts
Showing posts with label planners. Show all posts
Thursday, November 01, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
Why Planners Should Love Creativity
![]() |
Creativity and strategy is like a game of chess, only with less horses and more pawns |
Look at the link between creativity and effectiveness. http://www.ipa.co.uk/news/impact-of-creativity-on-effectiveness-increases
Look (in the UK at least) at the ads that the public truly get involved with and remember, they are entertaining and creative. The ones that stick in your head. It's been said so many times that advertising is far more long term than we ever try and track, and the influence of a great piece of work far far outlives the campaign.
Think about the Smash Martians that over 30 years later are still influencing people to buy Smash and have created a gigantically long term positive association. If we want to change behaviour then what way is more exciting that to create lifelong positive shifts towards our brands.
Consider those brands that have made, or reclaimed their fortune based upon great creative advertising: Stella Artois (a tiny brand until the Reassuringly Expensive campaign), Levis (a brand stuck with dated perceptions at the time - turned around several times by great work from BBH. I know personally that there are many brands that I have bought purely because of a piece of great work. (Sprite - Obey Your Thirst, Tango - You Know When You've Been Tango'd, Kia Ora - We all adora Kia Ora, etc). Hell, the advertising for Sony Minidisc not only made me buy a Sony MD player, the track on the ad was the very first thing I copied over to it.
Let's keep reading creative books as well as planning, strategy and behavioural books. (I just wanted an excuse to post this photo, it took ages to set up) |
A key part of planning is understanding the people who buy the products we sell, and finding a better, more effective way to talk to them. If you don't understand what types of advertising people like, how can you expect to produce ads that they will engage with and respond to? At the very least we should be finding exciting new ideas to spark off the imagination of the creatives. Taking the right thing to say, the right audience to say it to, and then giving the creatives a platform to create amazing work.
Maybe it didn't happen this way, but John Lewis's Always a Woman Ad perfectly nailed their target customer and brand reputation in a way that you'd hope a planner crafted into the right brief. Tango's 90's work created a brand that was bold, brave and noisy, giving the creatives a perfect opportunity to create some amazing work; the sort of brand thinking that you'd hope was down to good planning.
Every good planner I know cares about the creativity of the work. Maybe we need to put more effort into talking with the creative folk and creating some mututal understanding. Of course as planners we have other things to consider, but just because we write slides and draw graphs doesn't mean we don't love great work, and we should always be clear on that.
I believe that if we don't help inspire and fight for creativity, we really aren't doing our jobs right.
Friday, April 08, 2011
Thursday, February 21, 2008
The Big Fight LIVE!

I know of several love-hate relationships between successful planner/creatives who work together.
Now as I start in planning in a couple of months I would like to ask the following questions and see if I get some useful responses to learn from as regards to being a better planner and maintaining good relationships...
1. Why do some creatives dislike all planners? (and visa-versa)
2. What do planners do that endear them to creatives?
3. What do creatives that feel issues with planners want from them?
All responses appreciated!
Image from.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Shiny Happy People

Also, there is constant repetition of an ad fresh from the bad old days of advertising.
Regaine Hair ...stuff.
As a future member of the bowling ball head planner club (hi NP!!), this ad is incredible. Its literally saying that being bald makes you feel worthless and useless. Which is funny, as thats never been a thought i've had on the subject.
I find the ad offensive, patronising and downright ignorant. I would rather become shiny gracefully than ever give a company with ads like that a penny of my money.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Neinsteins Theory of Advertivity
One thing that always puzzles me is why planners (and designers and creatives as far as I know) always obsess about theories and theoretical charts. Is it a good thing or are we losing track of the bigger picture?
Recently our blogosphere has seen debates on big ideas vs small ideas, prog vs punk ads and so forth. But is it not the case that there is no right answer?
I like electronica, but I know not to play it at a Slayer gig. I like heavy metal, but I know not to play it at a wedding. Why is it that we often try to fit one type of music to every event, surely the best type of solution is the one that is most relevant to the brief and client?
Its also the case that even when a theory is right, it doesnt always stay that way. Einstein's theory of relativity has been effectively challenged on many occassions. Just because Bernbach and Lever were right back in the 50's and 60's doesnt mean they are 100% right now, but it also doesnt make them wrong.
So.
Do we theorise too much? Or are we justified to do so providing we always stay true to the needs of brands and clients? Or am I wrong too?
Recently our blogosphere has seen debates on big ideas vs small ideas, prog vs punk ads and so forth. But is it not the case that there is no right answer?
I like electronica, but I know not to play it at a Slayer gig. I like heavy metal, but I know not to play it at a wedding. Why is it that we often try to fit one type of music to every event, surely the best type of solution is the one that is most relevant to the brief and client?
Its also the case that even when a theory is right, it doesnt always stay that way. Einstein's theory of relativity has been effectively challenged on many occassions. Just because Bernbach and Lever were right back in the 50's and 60's doesnt mean they are 100% right now, but it also doesnt make them wrong.
So.
Do we theorise too much? Or are we justified to do so providing we always stay true to the needs of brands and clients? Or am I wrong too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)