Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Its not about being lazy...
Just to clarify for those keeping track, this blog was never intended to condone apathy or laziness. The point is that by taking a second to think through the best way to accomplish something, you may just find that you save yourself time and energy and become a more productive marketer in the process.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Hurry Up and Wait!!! Why Hurry?
When I first started working in advertising, I like so many other youngsters full of "piss and vinegar" would readily commit myself to evening chores that would come up in the hours before closing time as a gesture of my commitment to the cause and ambition in the workplace. As I got older and my involvements with clients increased in accordance with my experience, I would readily commit my teams to a similar fate. I was no longer the one always staying late, but I was essentially endorsing the behavior by agreeing to overnight deadlines. The more experience I gained, the more I realized agencies were constantly overcommitting themselves to deliver beyond "in a timely fashion." And it wasn't just little overnight projects, it was presentations of critical scale and importance that were being rushed. In fact, pretty much everything being sent over to clients had a rush order on it. But how often were deadlines met without warrant? How often was a quick turnaround met with a lengthy pause in terms of approvals or even feedback? How often was the quality of thought sacrificed for the urgency of a response?
My sense is that more than just a few of you agency folks out there can relate to the frustrations caused by "hurry up and wait" relationships with your clients. While I empathize, I think the agencies are as much to blame for the quandary as their clients. If you allow yourself to be treated as a vendor (i.e. "Yes Man"), not a partner - that's exactly how you should expect you and your teams to be treated. And this is exactly what you become when you rush to respond. "Yes sir may I have another" is not a behavior consistent with self-respecting individuals, nor agencies...so why let it happen in the first place?
Now I'll accept there is an agency/client dynamic that inherently requires an agency's commitment to their client's fullest satisfaction...it's a "client service business" and to ignore this would be agency suicide. However, I raise the issue, "is turning around a deliverable on an unrealistic and/or unnecessary timeline client service or client/agency dis-service?" I think there are a couple of things that suggest the latter...consider the potential bi-products:
1) You burn through and/or burn out employees
2) You condition your agency/organization to act, not to think
The former cannot be afforded if our industry is ever to be taken credibly among the masses. There is already a dearth of premium talent in the advertising world. It is a cynical and often thankless industry that to this day finds its credibility undermined by the many misunderstandings derivative from misrepresentation in urban legend and in Hollywood (these portrayals are nowhere close to accurate). Its hard enough to entice premium talent to take a serious look at advertising as a career (low pay at entry-level, zero loyalty, "cut-throat" reputation). Even worse, as an industry we have done a horrible job at nurturing and cultivating the talent we do manage to attract.
Many would counter that I'm being too sensitive, that late nights and exercises in seeming futility are simply part of the "weeding out" process that serve as a rite of passage in reaching advanced levels within the industry. That "we've all done it" so why should younger generation's experiences be any different. I challenge this position, in fact, I throw it out as absurd. "Because its been done" is NEVER a suitable grounds for continuing to do something. Too many variables in our world change over time.
Now consider the client perspective. Yes, its good to get what you want when you need it. You count on your agency to arm you with intelligence to make smart decisions and defend them. Further to this end, given the speed of business in today's world you count on your agency to do so fast. But how fast is too fast? Are most clients really getting what they need from their agencies? According to a February industry survey released by Forrester Research, not so much..."ad agencies are failing miserably to deliver what clients want." A major reason cited, agencies are not providing the level of strategic (thinking) insight, clients need. So is there a connection between "hurry up and wait" and client dissatisfaction with their agencies? I think so...
I think every time thought becomes an expense of response time (and this is all to often the case), agencies do their client a disservice. One one hand, quick responses are commonly ineffective because the appropriate time has not placed on interpreting a request - this for the most basic of deliverables. Agencies get back to clients without thinking something through and/or thinking of how the client might use the information provided and before you know it, you've spent more time doing 2-3 versions of something when all it would have taken was a moment to pause and consider (or ask) what exactly the client needed.
On a larger scale, consider exactly this, "what are clients REALLY looking for"...they are fighting for a seat at the table within their own organizations (see today's adage article "Why There's an Ad-Chief Exodus in the Auto Biz"). They want thinking that helps them look smarter, that demonstrates an understanding of their business (not just their marketing). But isn't this often, exactly what is sacrificed in turning around a project too abruptly? I wonder how many clients would be willing to sacrifice a faster turnaround time for better thinking from their agency? Ideally the word "sacrifice" would not be part of the equation, but is that always a reality? What if you had to choose?
Clearly, I've taken some liberties in making my point. Different scenarios are likely require different approaches and the weighting of variables of importance are likely to change in accordance (sometimes you just need an answer quickly). But, I do so to challenge conventions that I feel haunt agency hallways. Too often we find ourselves rushing to come up with an answer right away, whether it be the right answer or not. Too often we are quick to come back with an idea when more time might lend greater insight. I'll stick to my earlier comment, if thought becomes an expense of response time, an agency is doing their client a disservice.
So the next time (it might even be later today) a deadline is determined and pressure to deliver fast begins to mount, consider what value you are providing to your client and what you may be giving up by providing a quick answer?
My sense is that more than just a few of you agency folks out there can relate to the frustrations caused by "hurry up and wait" relationships with your clients. While I empathize, I think the agencies are as much to blame for the quandary as their clients. If you allow yourself to be treated as a vendor (i.e. "Yes Man"), not a partner - that's exactly how you should expect you and your teams to be treated. And this is exactly what you become when you rush to respond. "Yes sir may I have another" is not a behavior consistent with self-respecting individuals, nor agencies...so why let it happen in the first place?
Now I'll accept there is an agency/client dynamic that inherently requires an agency's commitment to their client's fullest satisfaction...it's a "client service business" and to ignore this would be agency suicide. However, I raise the issue, "is turning around a deliverable on an unrealistic and/or unnecessary timeline client service or client/agency dis-service?" I think there are a couple of things that suggest the latter...consider the potential bi-products:
1) You burn through and/or burn out employees
2) You condition your agency/organization to act, not to think
The former cannot be afforded if our industry is ever to be taken credibly among the masses. There is already a dearth of premium talent in the advertising world. It is a cynical and often thankless industry that to this day finds its credibility undermined by the many misunderstandings derivative from misrepresentation in urban legend and in Hollywood (these portrayals are nowhere close to accurate). Its hard enough to entice premium talent to take a serious look at advertising as a career (low pay at entry-level, zero loyalty, "cut-throat" reputation). Even worse, as an industry we have done a horrible job at nurturing and cultivating the talent we do manage to attract.
Many would counter that I'm being too sensitive, that late nights and exercises in seeming futility are simply part of the "weeding out" process that serve as a rite of passage in reaching advanced levels within the industry. That "we've all done it" so why should younger generation's experiences be any different. I challenge this position, in fact, I throw it out as absurd. "Because its been done" is NEVER a suitable grounds for continuing to do something. Too many variables in our world change over time.
Now consider the client perspective. Yes, its good to get what you want when you need it. You count on your agency to arm you with intelligence to make smart decisions and defend them. Further to this end, given the speed of business in today's world you count on your agency to do so fast. But how fast is too fast? Are most clients really getting what they need from their agencies? According to a February industry survey released by Forrester Research, not so much..."ad agencies are failing miserably to deliver what clients want." A major reason cited, agencies are not providing the level of strategic (thinking) insight, clients need. So is there a connection between "hurry up and wait" and client dissatisfaction with their agencies? I think so...
I think every time thought becomes an expense of response time (and this is all to often the case), agencies do their client a disservice. One one hand, quick responses are commonly ineffective because the appropriate time has not placed on interpreting a request - this for the most basic of deliverables. Agencies get back to clients without thinking something through and/or thinking of how the client might use the information provided and before you know it, you've spent more time doing 2-3 versions of something when all it would have taken was a moment to pause and consider (or ask) what exactly the client needed.
On a larger scale, consider exactly this, "what are clients REALLY looking for"...they are fighting for a seat at the table within their own organizations (see today's adage article "Why There's an Ad-Chief Exodus in the Auto Biz"). They want thinking that helps them look smarter, that demonstrates an understanding of their business (not just their marketing). But isn't this often, exactly what is sacrificed in turning around a project too abruptly? I wonder how many clients would be willing to sacrifice a faster turnaround time for better thinking from their agency? Ideally the word "sacrifice" would not be part of the equation, but is that always a reality? What if you had to choose?
Clearly, I've taken some liberties in making my point. Different scenarios are likely require different approaches and the weighting of variables of importance are likely to change in accordance (sometimes you just need an answer quickly). But, I do so to challenge conventions that I feel haunt agency hallways. Too often we find ourselves rushing to come up with an answer right away, whether it be the right answer or not. Too often we are quick to come back with an idea when more time might lend greater insight. I'll stick to my earlier comment, if thought becomes an expense of response time, an agency is doing their client a disservice.
So the next time (it might even be later today) a deadline is determined and pressure to deliver fast begins to mount, consider what value you are providing to your client and what you may be giving up by providing a quick answer?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)