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 brief. Show all posts
Showing posts with label brief. Show all posts
Thursday, November 01, 2012
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
APSOTW Extra Credit - World Cup Assignment
Hi folks, I've been a bit slack with my posting this week; and thought it was time for some updates. I'd like to start with a special APSOTW competition in honour of the world cup.Now normally Northern Planner or Rob Campbell take care of these, but as this is a topic I felt strongly about I have taken the reigns temporarily...
Background:
The FIFA World Cup is the biggest single sporting event in the world. Watched by billions of people around the world, it brings nations together in a unique way.
The beautiful game becomes the obsession of entire nations, everyone wants their country to win the ultimate prize in football.
But you already knew that...
The brief is this:
The rights to produce and sell the Official FIFA World Cup 2010 ball are expensive (around $350m I believe), with the event providing a huge opportunity for publicity and communication from sports brands.
However, Adidas have had to spend two weeks defending their World Cup ball (The Jabulani) against loud and widespread criticism from players, manager and the media.
The ball is being blamed for everything from the initial lack of goals, poor performances, lack of goals from free kicks, lack of player control, lack of pass accuracy and loss of shot accuracy.
Given the significance of the event and Jabulani product for Adidas; how should they react to the professional and public criticism?
Rules:
As this is an extra credit assignment I won't make it too strenuous...
- You have 2 sides of A4 for your answer. You can use these in whatever way you wish. You can scan them / email them / post them, whichever is easiest for you!
- You should consider both the professional and public criticism.
- Closing date is July 11th (7.30pm GMT) - Kick off for the World Cup Final
- Judges: Graeme Douglas - (Planning Director on Nike!), Rob Campbell, Moi, others may follow...
- Have fun!
.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
How Sacred Is The Brief?
Here is a thought or two on a topic that I have thought about a lot since becoming a planner. Just how important is the creative brief?
Now this is more a debate than an argument, so I would love to hear people's thoughts on the subject.
The creative brief seems in some circles to be seen as this all powerful master document for the creative work that should follow. An unquestionable piece of Moses esque tabletry that defies all who doubt it. But this makes no sense, we know the point of a brief is to inspire the creatives and lead then down the right direction. Yet as is often quoted, there is rarely a right answer... simply more/less right ones.
If we do our job right then being on brief is good of course. But what if slightly off brief gives a better creative territory? What if there is an idea so good that only works with a tweaked brief. What if we discover something new part way through the process?
I had this argument in the pub with a creative who was discussing a brief where the favoured work was actually slightly off brief. My viewpoint there was (and still is) that we should always be confidence our brief work is spot on, but if creatives are to believe that we have creativity at the heart of what we do, we have to be man enough to admit when an idea (whether from creative or planning) is good enough to skip brief anality. Otherwise why should they believe us when we say the next idea is better because it's on brief.
A 8-10am analogy for this was this:
A hard punch that's 90% on target is better than a weak punch that's 100% on target.
Thoughts?
Now this is more a debate than an argument, so I would love to hear people's thoughts on the subject.
The creative brief seems in some circles to be seen as this all powerful master document for the creative work that should follow. An unquestionable piece of Moses esque tabletry that defies all who doubt it. But this makes no sense, we know the point of a brief is to inspire the creatives and lead then down the right direction. Yet as is often quoted, there is rarely a right answer... simply more/less right ones.
If we do our job right then being on brief is good of course. But what if slightly off brief gives a better creative territory? What if there is an idea so good that only works with a tweaked brief. What if we discover something new part way through the process?
I had this argument in the pub with a creative who was discussing a brief where the favoured work was actually slightly off brief. My viewpoint there was (and still is) that we should always be confidence our brief work is spot on, but if creatives are to believe that we have creativity at the heart of what we do, we have to be man enough to admit when an idea (whether from creative or planning) is good enough to skip brief anality. Otherwise why should they believe us when we say the next idea is better because it's on brief.
A 8-10am analogy for this was this:
A hard punch that's 90% on target is better than a weak punch that's 100% on target.
Thoughts?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Hey Dad it's One for the Show...
At last! Both the One Show and D&ad awards have announced that they will take action against scam ads that were not produced to a brief and requested by the client. Brilliantly, D&ad will make ECD's vouch for each ad submitted, and will name and shame those who break the rules.It's great to know that only real ads will be included after the numerous debacles over the last few years. Admittedly there is still space for fractional media budgeted pieces, but 1 problem is better than 2!
I'm all in favour of showing off the best creative we can make, but recently it's been like drugged up athletes winning medals; it's an unfair advantage that should never be merited. That said, I am in favour of creating a specific award for un-sanctioned ads, a space for us to push the boundaries without cheating.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
A Little Birdy Told Me
The new Robinsons bird house ad is just adorable. Full of sweetness, character and witty details that make it an original way out of a brief that has been seen a hundred times before.
It seems to me to be one of those ads where the atmosphere of nature is enough to sell the idea over explicity demonstrating lack of artificiality and so on. One of those where thinking it through is to try too hard...
My wife pointed this out to me last week and I missed it until last night, thanks for the tip!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
