pe care il gasiti aici si la care cativa oameni au pus comentarii. editorialul relua o idee, pe care o mai discutasem cu colegii de agentie, despre impresia eronata a unor clienti - sau chiar a unor colegi din industrie - referitor la cat de usor sau nu este sa faci Internet. I-am spus "complexul Facebook" pentru ca mi se pare ca Facebook a facut cel mai mare serviciu si in acelasi timp si cel mai mare deserviciu marketingului online in Romania. Serviciu, ptr ca nimeni nu poate sa ignore avantul acestei platforme si toata lumea a fost nevoita sa isi faca un cont, asa ca, vrand nevrand toata lumea a inceput sa foloseasca apps, sa invete sa scrie niste statusuri, sa inteleaga cum si cat de repede merge o stire pe net, ce este interesant etc. Deserviciu, pentru ca nivelul de "user friendliness" pe care il vad ei la FB este transferat automat si proiectelor pe care vor sa le dezvolte pe net fara niciun moment pierdut sa se gandeasca la cat timp le-a luat celor de la FB sa dezvolte platforma, cate erori si buguri au fost rezvoltate, cate probleme de scalabilitate surmontate etc.
oricum, problema e mare si eu am scris putin si mai degraba histrionic despre asta pe Digital IQ Ads. Insa, ce mi-ar placea - si am spus-o si in comentariile de la editorial - ar fi ca oamenii sa sugereze solutii. Si ar fi si mai misto daca nu am arde-o cu fraze sforaitoare si absurde ca "e nevoie de educatie in piata" "ne lipsesc profesionistii". Evident ca astea sunt cauzele problemei, lipsa de educatie si de profesionisti, dar nu poti raspunde unei intrebari despre solutii cu cauze. Asta se cam numeste "a bate inutil din gura" si, din pacate, televiziunile romanesti sunt populate numai cu oameni care stiu sa faca asta si numai asta.
deci, daca cineva are vreo idee practica de propus, ar fi misto sa o scrie undeva. eu ma gandisem la un videocast unde sa explicam the basics intr-un limbaj simplu. cred ca s-ar distribui usor si repede.
alte idei?
.............
Si, da, m-am hotarat ca o sa scriu alternativ in romana si engleza. Practic sunt subiecte despre care cred ca trebuie sa stie si oameni din afara dar sunt unele legate exclusiv de Romania.
4/17/2010
4/11/2010
Why it's good to be in digital this year
three reasons:
1. any creative that gets done this year will have a digital component if only for two simple reasons: a) www recorded the fastest growth and marketing managers will want to get on that boat b) www remains cheaper
2. most international brands will try to cut regional expenses by making creative hubs and sharing creative work which means that some regions will only get access to dubbing other people's creative, but so far the movement of localizing websites has not caught on completely, simply because sometimes it's cheaper to make one locally
3. every agency is trying to become digital either by integrating digital in all its operations or by working more closely with its digital siblings. digital work results from that more than ATL work
so, if you're in digital, you're the lucky ones.
the same works for direct, or e-direct and mobile :D
1. any creative that gets done this year will have a digital component if only for two simple reasons: a) www recorded the fastest growth and marketing managers will want to get on that boat b) www remains cheaper
2. most international brands will try to cut regional expenses by making creative hubs and sharing creative work which means that some regions will only get access to dubbing other people's creative, but so far the movement of localizing websites has not caught on completely, simply because sometimes it's cheaper to make one locally
3. every agency is trying to become digital either by integrating digital in all its operations or by working more closely with its digital siblings. digital work results from that more than ATL work
so, if you're in digital, you're the lucky ones.
the same works for direct, or e-direct and mobile :D
4/10/2010
4/07/2010
Why procurement has no business handling pitches
Of course this is a post written under the influence of some major "pissed-off"ness because we lost a major pitch for which we worked really hard and naturally you cannot but be a sore loser. But more than that this is a realization of almost 8 months of in-crisis pitching - not just for us but for our ATL sister agency and also some half dozen other agencies we are friendly with, where we have seen the following repeat itself enough to become a pattern.
1. most in-crisis pitches are run by procurement teams [secretly meaning 'we're only interested in the money']
2. most in-crisis pitches have EXACTLY the same format: request for credentials, request for offer made of CVs and creative plus money. lots of useless paperwork, because participating agencies project the ideal team onto all RFOs and have a standard credential they send to everyone.]
3. no face-to-face unless you get picked to be among the few going to stage final
4. no debrief unless you really ask for it and then whatever gets discussed then gets emailed to everyone for fairness reasons
5. one hour for presentation
6. humongous brief with 70% of the qualification criteria going to.... financial :D. Basically testing to see if you're willing to do shitloads of work for no money.
But what gets to me most, aside from the heartlessness of this process is that final letter, where they tell you that you did not qualify. Thanks for playing but you suck, and we will not even take the time to tell you why. You may have prepared a 300 page presentation for us, which you printed in 4 copies because the RFO asked you to - yeah, we print layouts of online banners ... figure that!, but you do not deserve more than the standard letter of 'thanks but no thanks' because we were too busy to really understand why we picked someone else.
And while I understand the power-position in which everyone in procurement is these days, what with the crisis and everyone willing to do almost anything to get a budget, I think that somewhere in the brand management team someone should realize that this is not the way to handle what is, by all accounts, the relationship with your most important partner: the ad agency. Even when you DO NOT pick them, the point is not to treat them like they're nobody. Because sometimes the winning one happens to be crap, and maybe you want to drop them and move on to the runner-up. And if the runner up think you're basically heartless bastards, you're down to another RFO process. And this is not "not nice", but, in terms procurement can understand, it's NOT EFFICIENT.
LATER UPDATE: I did call the company asking for more info. I got an email asking for my phone number. So at least they were decent, and tried but I still do not know why we lost.
In general, however, I notice from the comments that, what with the crisis and all, the majority view - 2 out of 3 comments :P - is that the factor called 'serendipity' no longer plays a part in agency-client relationships. Weirdly enough, I used to think the same until I realized that the clients where we did find the same wavelength tend to be the ones for which we work most efficiently, most enthusiastically and where we get the best results. I think agencies like W+K and, locally, Headvertising have made this kind of "human" treatment of partners a landmark of their business style and it's worked (don't you just envy posts like these? :D)
BUT, having been bludgeoned over my stupid head by the true business people of this real world, with words like "standards, professionalism, process, transparency, streamlining, capitalism, money" I assume I am just a silly silly girl to think that writing to extra lines in the 10 reject letters is not a big deal and will take my silly silly ideas and put them to sleep for tonight :D
LATER LATER EDIT: Got a call from marketing person - not procurement, who was nice enough to explain why we lost but said they would never put in on record. Feels good to know we are good enough but not good enough at politics :D
LATER LATER LATER EDIT: funnily enough got an official email from the procurement person saying basically that "our creative approach" sucked salty balls of chocolate although we were cheap enough :D. So, there you have it: marketing says we are creative enough, procurement says we are cheap enough, yet we lost :D. it must be we're ugly or something
1. most in-crisis pitches are run by procurement teams [secretly meaning 'we're only interested in the money']
2. most in-crisis pitches have EXACTLY the same format: request for credentials, request for offer made of CVs and creative plus money. lots of useless paperwork, because participating agencies project the ideal team onto all RFOs and have a standard credential they send to everyone.]
3. no face-to-face unless you get picked to be among the few going to stage final
4. no debrief unless you really ask for it and then whatever gets discussed then gets emailed to everyone for fairness reasons
5. one hour for presentation
6. humongous brief with 70% of the qualification criteria going to.... financial :D. Basically testing to see if you're willing to do shitloads of work for no money.
But what gets to me most, aside from the heartlessness of this process is that final letter, where they tell you that you did not qualify. Thanks for playing but you suck, and we will not even take the time to tell you why. You may have prepared a 300 page presentation for us, which you printed in 4 copies because the RFO asked you to - yeah, we print layouts of online banners ... figure that!, but you do not deserve more than the standard letter of 'thanks but no thanks' because we were too busy to really understand why we picked someone else.
And while I understand the power-position in which everyone in procurement is these days, what with the crisis and everyone willing to do almost anything to get a budget, I think that somewhere in the brand management team someone should realize that this is not the way to handle what is, by all accounts, the relationship with your most important partner: the ad agency. Even when you DO NOT pick them, the point is not to treat them like they're nobody. Because sometimes the winning one happens to be crap, and maybe you want to drop them and move on to the runner-up. And if the runner up think you're basically heartless bastards, you're down to another RFO process. And this is not "not nice", but, in terms procurement can understand, it's NOT EFFICIENT.
LATER UPDATE: I did call the company asking for more info. I got an email asking for my phone number. So at least they were decent, and tried but I still do not know why we lost.
In general, however, I notice from the comments that, what with the crisis and all, the majority view - 2 out of 3 comments :P - is that the factor called 'serendipity' no longer plays a part in agency-client relationships. Weirdly enough, I used to think the same until I realized that the clients where we did find the same wavelength tend to be the ones for which we work most efficiently, most enthusiastically and where we get the best results. I think agencies like W+K and, locally, Headvertising have made this kind of "human" treatment of partners a landmark of their business style and it's worked (don't you just envy posts like these? :D)
BUT, having been bludgeoned over my stupid head by the true business people of this real world, with words like "standards, professionalism, process, transparency, streamlining, capitalism, money" I assume I am just a silly silly girl to think that writing to extra lines in the 10 reject letters is not a big deal and will take my silly silly ideas and put them to sleep for tonight :D
LATER LATER EDIT: Got a call from marketing person - not procurement, who was nice enough to explain why we lost but said they would never put in on record. Feels good to know we are good enough but not good enough at politics :D
LATER LATER LATER EDIT: funnily enough got an official email from the procurement person saying basically that "our creative approach" sucked salty balls of chocolate although we were cheap enough :D. So, there you have it: marketing says we are creative enough, procurement says we are cheap enough, yet we lost :D. it must be we're ugly or something
3/30/2010
Social media strategy
Interesting fact: during a recent digital gathering in London, most heads of main UK brands said that they had "no digital strategy for social media yet". It seems that everyone is just going with the flow for the time being :D
Interesting fact no. 2: local brand manager for nice and exciting brand confessed that the only apps she truly sees the worth of are branded utility apps like USPS's gimmick which lets you calculate the type of box you need for your to-be-shipped item (virtual box)
Interesting fact no. 2: local brand manager for nice and exciting brand confessed that the only apps she truly sees the worth of are branded utility apps like USPS's gimmick which lets you calculate the type of box you need for your to-be-shipped item (virtual box)
Pretend brand love
Romanians are a lot about pretending they buy into things. we have lots of political parties but no political ideologies. we have lots of churches and people crossing themselves but not a lot of true believers. we have a lot of people who are 'fans of jogging' on Facebook but do not own sneakers.
Recently the pretend trend has hit a new low with people becoming interested in fasting. it's right before Easter and everyone who is in any way trendy needs to discuss how hard and intensely he or she is fasting. it's talked about on tv, in ad agencies and on the street. there are levels to fasting, and you are fast warlock if you refrain from sex and swearing which seem to be two things God really hates.
interestingly, someone smarter than me explained that fasting is about humble, humility and not really making a fuss about all that but hey... we are 'pretend nation'
the same works with brands here: we really love them until they screw up minimally, or until some friend comes up and says that the brand sucks. if you market a brand your commitment to its success is limited to its budget. you care about it as much as your money will let you. if something is good for your brand but it requires an extra phone call to your manager, well, heck, it's not worth it. you like the ritual, but not the commitment.
pretend brand love is a symptom of people who are afraid of having an opinion, are unable to defend it and unwilling to stand up for themselves. so it's easier to go with the flow and not commit. it's easier to cross yourself when you pass a church than to NOT cheat your colleague out of his bonus.
pretend. it works. it keeps people afloat and seemingly happy. :(
Recently the pretend trend has hit a new low with people becoming interested in fasting. it's right before Easter and everyone who is in any way trendy needs to discuss how hard and intensely he or she is fasting. it's talked about on tv, in ad agencies and on the street. there are levels to fasting, and you are fast warlock if you refrain from sex and swearing which seem to be two things God really hates.
interestingly, someone smarter than me explained that fasting is about humble, humility and not really making a fuss about all that but hey... we are 'pretend nation'
the same works with brands here: we really love them until they screw up minimally, or until some friend comes up and says that the brand sucks. if you market a brand your commitment to its success is limited to its budget. you care about it as much as your money will let you. if something is good for your brand but it requires an extra phone call to your manager, well, heck, it's not worth it. you like the ritual, but not the commitment.
pretend brand love is a symptom of people who are afraid of having an opinion, are unable to defend it and unwilling to stand up for themselves. so it's easier to go with the flow and not commit. it's easier to cross yourself when you pass a church than to NOT cheat your colleague out of his bonus.
pretend. it works. it keeps people afloat and seemingly happy. :(
NYT business best sellers (paperback. it's a damned crisis, people)
Somehow I feel only people working in marketing are buying books in the States these days :D
[yeah, and BTW BN.com is still NOT letting me pay with my NON-Physically located in the US credit card so anyone holding the magical key to getting some of their ebooks, please do help. and, yes I have tried to come up with a valid US address but I gather they check the credit card address or something]
Palimpsestic advertising
This kind of title makes you almost invisible for search engines :D
Naturally writing 'poster hacks' would be a lot easier but then I would not be able to comment on this trend of "commenting" on already made artifacts. And since advertising seems to be one of the most accessible forms of expression, commenting on advertising is happening all over.
This one is my favorite - the original poster turns into that when the light turns on at night, but there's a whole list here
3/27/2010
Earth Hour Yeiii
DARK
[as an aside, I understand some people are putting on a music show, a grand one, to celebrate the turning off of lights...makes COMPLETE sense to try to save energy by plugging in hundreds of watts of speakers and so on ...but hey, complete darkness for the rest :D]
[as an aside, I understand some people are putting on a music show, a grand one, to celebrate the turning off of lights...makes COMPLETE sense to try to save energy by plugging in hundreds of watts of speakers and so on ...but hey, complete darkness for the rest :D]
Be stupid
I like this campaign by diesel. In Romanian we would say "nu fi absurd, nu fi tampit, nu fi penibil" :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
