a rant on ad agencies differentiation: part 2 the so-called proprietary process

A noted in part 1 I believe the core of any advertising agency differentiation is “it’s about the work.”

But.

Often the agency that is not instantly ‘knowable’ by its work immediately drops down into “our proprietary process” mode (which suggests .. “We can do as good a shit as those Crispin/JWT/GSDM/whomever folk because we have a nifty whizbang process).

Why does everybody go to process? Easy.

As it is ‘all about the work’ here is how it goes:

Is the work smart, insightful, educational, entertaining and effective? No (drop out. Process won’t save you. You don’t belong here in the discussion) Yes. Move on.

Ok. Do you do it consistently? No (you are in trouble. Particularly if you say something like ‘we can but our clients don’t let us.’). Answer Yes? Move on.

Ok. Do you have some formula that guarantees that consistent work? No. we don’t have a process. Its sheer luck of the draw. (okay. Here is why you need a process).

The typical answer here ?

‘Well, yes and no. we don’t have a formula but we do have a consistent process we like to work within that increases the likelihood of success. But, no, there are no guarantees. But our process is pretty good. And we are pretty good. And you are gonna fire our ass if we aren’t successful so we are highly motivated to get it right.”

Ok. But if you are consistent why won’t you guarantee it?

(without getting into compensation discussions)

‘Well, a process is simply a means to an end. It helps uncover true insights and ideas but it only informs us to develop the creative thinking it doesn’t develop the actual creative ideas. “(although it can on occasion but you never tell anyone that).

So.

That is your argument for having a non proprietary solid process. But hanging your hat on your process to differentiate is nuts. It’s your work.

But.

Day in and day out scan advertising agency websites and sit through dozens of credentials presentations and if you have enough coffee to stay awake (which is actually not that tough because most are pretty entertaining and everyone likes to look at ‘the work’ …. Oh … the work?!? … ok … moving on) you will have to endure everyone talking about their process. Their proprietary magic cube that generates the work.

Here is what you want to show.

Okay. And I want to be clear. In this simple process chart there are boundaries but freedom. The lack of detail doesn’t mean that there is not discipline but the freedom is in the simplicity:

A simple “you & I discuss, we take information, we start thinking, we make sure time & costs meet you expectations, we do whatever voodoo we do on that particular assignment that generates work, we show you work.”

But.

Simplicity seems too chaotic. So we decide to show detail:

And then we invest ¾ of a meeting talking about process in the presentation because we either:

(a) feel like we have to discuss each detail point or (b) the audience is so confused they have to ask a zillion  questions to figure out what the hell you are showing.

But.

This is the truth. This is really the process chart that reflects a simple truth:

But telling the truth is not good. Because no one wants to trust chaos.

Unfortunately advertising agencies are part chaos (because that is the characteristic of creative thinking) but we pony up a proprietary process to prove consistency and logic and a sense of comfort. Regardless (and this is where I repeat myself) it all ends up with the work. Process is a means to an end.

Here is the real issue. (I think I am going to say something smart here so pay attention)

People confuse process and disciplined thinking.

You look at that last chart (which IS truly what happens in a creative process) and you think chaos. Well. Not really. Let’s call it organized chaos. Or maybe even better said “disciplined chaos.”

First.

I dare you to talk with any creative thinker. Any creative thinker. It need not be an adverting agency person. It could be a scientist seeking a cure for cancer. A NASA engineer seeking a way to build a space ship to leave our galaxy. A product development person seeking an innovative product to meet an unmet need.

Discovery is messy.

Doesn’t mean they aren’t disciplined and have a “way” to attack it.

It is not a process. Or a strict methodology. Because in the end discovery is often about the unexpected or the unintended.

So. What do I mean?

You can attain an awesome unintended result despite a focused articulate smart objective/strategy “aim.”

So if the result doesn’t match the initial objective do you throw the result away?

Gosh.

That means penicillin never happened.

Email never happened (the military discovered it).

That means the atom is ignored.

That means America was never discovered.

People don’t like to hear it but it is exactly the same in advertising and communications.

Discovery is messy.

(sorry about that)

And having a proprietary process may sound good and make you feel good what matters is if your messy discovery creates good ‘output.’

I guess what I am saying is if you are an ad agency and you are investing a lot of emotional and intellectual energy into outlining and developing a whizbang process than I would suggest you are wasting good energy.

But.

With that said.

Say you have your process and you want to differentiate yourself.

Well.

Get to ‘the work.’

Anyway.

Here is my last thought.

Controlling your destiny and differentiation (or being distinct).

You have a whizbang process that looks an awful like everyone else’s but has a nifty name but you have a limited work portfolio. And you want more clients. Bigger clients. But the new potential clients don’t feel comfortable because you just don’t have the ‘work proof’ to get you over the hump.

If I were an agency owner or business development director and I had a budget I would build a soup to nuts beta case study. High risk. High return.

Pick a company any company. Doesn’t matter (although I would imagine if they are really high on your wish list you may as well put ‘em in there). Run them through your process. Get the insight or idea or whatever your process is supposed to generate. Do the work (yes. That is clearly speculative work.) Test it. Show that it “works.” Go back and rework it of it doesn’t work. Get something that works.

There is your proof.

In fact, your process worked so frickin’ well you didn’t even have to have the client there. And when you talk to a client? “Imagine how much better the work would be if a client were involved to provide us with the ‘x’ factor.”

Bundle enough of these and you have test proofed your process, proven you can do the work. Show work that works.

Do large agencies have to do this? Nope. When I was at J Walter Thompson I had so much shit in my bag I could pull out there weren’t enough minutes in a meeting to be able to show examples.

Do agencies who want to get out of group three have to do things like this? Yup.

That is the price of getting out of group three (if you want to get out … because you can make a fine living in group three if you are comfortable there).

There you go.

My rant on advertising agency differentiation parts one and two.

Interestingly I would imagine that while I focused on the advertising industry this applies to many industries where there are massive amounts of commodity like service providers dwelling in some nondescript morass of non differentiated excellence.

So maybe this can apply to you as well.

Hopefully my rants benefit someone other than just my own conscience.

If not? My conscience is at peace.