• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Looking back, it seems fate had something to do with why I ended up in L.A., in advertising, spending more than 25 years working on Honda. I grew up in Dearborn, Michigan, in the shadow of Ford World Headquarters. My mom went to Ringling School of Art in Florida, and my grandfather was an executive at Ford. Art and autos.

Serendipity may be a better word.

From an early age, I seemed to have a knack for art encouraged by my mother. Colorings showing up on the fridge.

High school found me at the only public school I know of, Edsel Ford, that taught humanities as a requirement. Art and music for all. Serendipity again. My class curriculums were composed of atypical segments in art history, painting, wood making – industrial design. I had the opportunity to learn about typesetting, offset printing – publishing our own newspaper, ads and all.

This, in conjunction with a fortuitous visit to downtown Detroit with my mom’s good friend, the business relations manager at the ad agency for Chrysler, showed me there was a living to be made in the world of advertising.

Like my mother, I decided art school was the collegiate path I wanted to pursue. As I found out, an expensive proposition for sure. But there just so happened to be one of the best design schools in the country in downtown Detroit: College for Creative Studies.

With my high-school portfolio in hand, I found myself in an interview with the admissions dean. After a quick glance at my book, she looked at me and said, “I see you as a graphic communications major.”

The College for Creative Studies, besides having professors who were working professionals, also had a great visiting artist program. I was able to meet the likes of Milton Glaser, Donald Judd and John Updike. My junior year led me to a semester abroad in Florence, Italy, where I studied Italian design and took a film course on Federico Fellini. My professor in the course had an infectious ability to bring out the story–telling in all of us. Which may have planted the seeds for my passion for directing.

Art school also steered me to an internship at Young & Rubicam, my first stint in agency life. Living in the paste-up room and cutting mats, with an opportunity now and then to lay out newspaper ads for local car dealers.

After Y&R, I took a job with a small design firm having visions of becoming the next Saul Bass, still exploring the choice of either design or advertising in my head.

As a graduation gift, my father gave me a free airline ticket to wherever I wanted to go. New York? California? California was the better deal. I flew to San Diego, where a family friend had become the account supervisor on the local McDonald’s business at Needham Harper Worldwide. He arranged for me to meet with the creative director of the Los Angeles office, Larry Postaer (the “P” in RPA).

After quite a wait in the lobby, I entered a smoke-filled corner office where the shades were drawn. Lucky for me I had all my work on slides with a portable light box. “Nice stuff” was the extent of the conversation.

Days later back in Detroit, I found that Larry had left a message with an offer.

I asked Larry, “Can I have a few days to think about it?”

“What do you need to do? Consult the Ouija board?” was his reply.

You see, the next day I had an interview at the GM design studio. I told them about Larry’s offer. “California? Honda? You’ve got to take it.” Needless to say, I took it.

Fate? Serendipity? Who knows?

I just finished reading the Steve Jobs biography, and the one thing I picked up from him is that sometimes organizations have to believe in something that is not proven and gamble it all. It is my feeling that the members of the Art Directors Club want a resource that forces them to become better creative professionals. As the new Executive Director of the Club, I will be betting all my chips on the future—studying, learning, exposing and embracing the changes we face now, and will face in the years to come.

For 92 years (which is older than most of your grandparents), the Art Directors Club has been at the center of the advertising, design and visual communications industries. Huddled around this core, have been agencies and creative professionals that came to the Club for two main reasons: to network and to celebrate the best work created by their peers. It was an easy formula for the members, and an easy matter for the Club to implement year after year.

The social, technological, and interactive environments have instigated substantial change in the industry and in our lives, and this change has forced everything and everybody to evolve. Some of us resisted, some embraced, and some of us are still trying to come to grips with it.

Moving forward, The Art Directors Club is going to be different.  We are not going to keep on doing what we have done in the past, rather we are going to throw ourselves headfirst into the uncertainty of change—and revitalize our mission to Connect, Provoke and Elevate. It’s easy to see where the industry is going to be tomorrow, but can you see a year into its future? Three? Five? The role of the new Club will be to start focusing on predicting the things that will come tomorrow, and to empower and educate our members to face these changes.

In an industry that doesn’t really believe in career education or training (ask most creative directors if they have taken management or technical training courses lately), the Club will become more than just a meeting place. It will become the place for our members to learn—and be exposed to topics, technologies and thinking that they won’t find in their day-to-day work experience. The Club will become your part-time University. Whether you drop in for a drink at one of our many events, or visit the websites to read an article or watch a video, I will make sure you come out a changed person and a better professional.

Sometimes you will come out with answers to your questions, sometimes you’ll come out with more questions, but I promise you won’t come out the same. It’s our obligation to you, and it is the challenge I have set for the Club.

Before online social networking came along, people actually used to meet face to face. Those were the days of ‘Humanbook.’ Call me old school, but I plan on bringing that back big time. Most people change jobs like a frog jumping lily pads in a storm, and I have discovered that the best business contacts throughout my life were always the ones that came through unexpectedly at events where I wasn’t expecting to meet anyone.

Our industry is changing so fast that you can’t even buy or write a book about it, because by the time it is published, it’s old news (imagine buying a book on social networks a year ago). The only way to pick up the freshest, latest know-how is to get it straight from the source of the river. The fact that this is usually done over drinks at the Club can’t hurt! Anybody want another cocktail alongside your web 2.0 know-how? I’m in!

You will notice that the Art Directors Club will be focusing a lot of energy on creating new content for the industry. Most advertising associations, non-profits and award shows tend to steer clear of controversial issues. But topics like racial discrimination, the role of women in our business, the debate of comp and agency pitch work, crowdsourcing and the role of award shows should be topics that are dealt with directly, openly and perhaps even harshly. The Club should be the neutral stomping ground where these debates take place, and I plan on facilitating that for all of us to talk, debate and learn from each other. Like Ken Blanchard, a world-renowned speaker said, “None of us is as smart as all of us.”

I know all our members understand that change is here, and instead of shielding you from it, we are going to hold hands together and step forward in unison like an unstoppable force towards it.

I hope you’ll join me.

Ignacio Oreamuno
Executive Director

Nick Bailey

There is a malign influence stalking our industry, turning formerly enthusiastic, optimistic creative professionals into Munch-Scream-faced misanthropes, shivering, twitching wrecks, desperate to get out, to get away, to go anywhere to escape the next two-minutes of fresh hell that awaits.

What began with just a few, isolated cases is now a scourge, infecting otherwise good work and turning it into a will-sapping grey-goo of guitar-driven banality, all wrapped up with a perky VO.

I speak, of course, of the BAD AWARD CASE STUDY FILM.

The BACSF will suck the life-force out of your body via your retinas, until even to lift your index finger to click and scrub forward through the unintelligible voice-over to find the part where it ACTUALLY GETS TO THE POINT takes a super-human effort; until (even though before you started watching you had a pretty good command of English) attempting to extract some kind of actual meaning from the turgid marketing-speak you’re hearing is like being forced to translate Dostoyevsky using only a ‘Russian for Dummies’ text book against the clock with loaded gun pointed at your temple.

How did this happen? When did we all sign up to this mediocrity charter? When did it become OK for the work not to be able to speak for itself? It’s amazing how often in Jury rooms or in the bars afterwards you end up having conversations like, “Did you understand this or that piece of work? I totally didn’t get it.” Even though a team of people who are supposedly communications experts spent a bunch of hours and whole load of money trying to explain it to you. Can it really be that complicated?

A true BACSF needs no analysis to identify, but they do share some increasingly consistent soul-sapping conventions:

• The whole ‘“the problem”…. “The insight”…’ voiceover formula. It’s impossible for my heart not to sink when the first words I hear are
  “The Problem” – I’ve got enough of my own without hearing about someone else’s; it’s depressing.
• The sexless ‘something for everyone’ indie music. Who wrote that rule? Are other music genres too potentially polarizing? Why not mix it up a little? Who knows: you might actually elicit an emotional response from someone – or even wake them up.
• The po-faced seriousness. What’s wrong with having a bit of a laugh? Or (here’s a radical idea) actually seeking to entertain? An award reel that manages to crack a smile would have me loving its creators forever.

Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys once said, ‘beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick it once and you suck forever’ – he could have been warning us all about the phenomenon of the BACSF. The presence of all this lameness seems to be bringing everyone down to its level so that, far from inspiring us all the raise our game and push the BACSF into the irritating minority niche where it belongs, it’s growing and spreading and spawning hideous imitation after hideous imitation, not unlike the Structured Reality TV show genre. Its very ubiquity is making us all blind to it: film after film after film and it’s as if they’ve all been produced by the same former State Broadcaster of an ex-Soviet republic, rather than world-class advertising agencies.

And here’s what’s worse: The infection has not been contained to the closed, already self-regarding world of the award circuit, where it could only do limited damage. It has broken through, escaped and – with potentially dire consequences – infected the next generation.

Yes. The BACSF has infiltrated and begun to spread its dire influence among student competitions. So that instead of student work feeling fresh and challenging and leftfield and exciting and interesting, it’s beginning to feel tired and clichéd and dry and even sometimes depressing – wrapped in the same dry, clichéd by-the-numbers award-reel conventions the rest of the industry is falling prey to.

Here’s my message to students: Every minute you’re spending recruiting your actor friends with the ‘good’ VO voice, or cutting in iMovie to a generic- guitar-based kookie Indie rock outfit, is a minute you’re not spending interrogating your idea, challenging it, improving it, pushing it, amplifying it. Desist, before it’s too late.

And as for the rest of us: enough already.

So, it’s a sunny South African Friday afternoon. Five of us are huddled around the boardroom table, staring at the telephone that sits in front of us. Faintly you can hear the sound of creatives enjoying a few drinks at the agency bar downstairs. I’ve been here before. Eagerly awaiting the call from a potential piece of business you just pitched, to hopefully tell you that you’ve just been appointed as their new ad agency.

Alas, today is not to be our day. Hence this will be more of a rant than an article.

I recently came across a quote by Henry Ford that reads, “If I had asked them what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” I found that so poignant given that according to the potential client, the reason we lost that pitch was because the research didn’t test so well.

It has always been my assumption – or rather educated guess – that if you show people something they’re unfamiliar with next to something familiar, and ask them to choose, the likelihood of them choosing the familiar is almost guaranteed. It’s human nature. We always retreat to what we know.

Unfortunately, in a business where standing out is half your battle won, sometimes you need to do things that are foreign or unfamiliar to people. That’s how you break through the clutter. The predicament is that the large majority of normal, everyday people are not break-through-the-clutter inclined, so we can’t expect them to inform our decisions as to what will lead to new and fresh territory. Yet these are the people you’ll generally find in research groups. This is the problem with research; it puts creatives in a position of being led by our consumers as opposed to us leading them.

Our job isn’t to necessarily sell people the products they want. Our job is to sell people the things they don’t even know they want yet.

Even the late great Steve Jobs echoed the sentiments of Ford when he said, “If I had asked people what they wanted no one would have said the iPad, iPhone or iPod.” They probably wouldn’t have even been in the same realm if you’d asked them to describe it. Yet he did it. He went with his gut feeling and everything that told him that he was doing the right thing. Today very few people can dispute the resultant impact that his thinking has had on the world.

A Creative Director I once worked under used to say, “If it makes you uncomfortable, then you should probably do it.” I’ve always loved working by that rule because it always leads me somewhere different.

Let me put it this way: what do you think would happen if we pulled an average person off the street and said to them, “Okay, so in the ad we’re going to have a gorilla on a set of drums doing a rendition of Phil Collins’ ‘Something In The Air Tonight’… oh, and by the way, the ad is for Cadbury’s chocolate,” they would tell you that you’re crazy. But as we all know, that piece of communication worked like a charm in every way possible.

Look I get it, we’re dealing with our clients’ money and as such, clients like to feel comfortable and have surety, and unfortunately research provides that. But comfort and surety are firmly grounded in the familiar and the done-before and we all know what that does to brands. You become staled or fall into a sea of sameness.

Sometimes though, we are our own worst enemies because let’s be honest, the real reason a client would engage research on creative work would be because they’re not 100% comfortable. Which means they don’t trust your ponytailed, skinny jean-wearing creative agency ass.

Most of the brands that create breakthrough work do it not because they have better creatives who can sell better work, but rather because the client has a strong and unwavering trust in their ad agency. Their agency is not seen as a supplier, but rather a partner and an ambassador for their brand. So when creative work is sold – no matter how crazy it is – the client knows that the agency is doing it in the best interests of the brand.

So while I may sit here and point fingers at research companies, a simple glaring truth does exist that if we, as creatives at agencies, fostered stronger relationships with our clients based on trust, then the need for research could be eliminated in some situations. Not all the time. Just sometimes, because while it might be the bane of our existence, and while it may not be the most infallible system in the world, it does sometimes ‘keep us honest’ as creative people. Because sometimes one can ‘overindulge in a creative wank,’ and miss the entire point of what the ad should do, which is move products off shelves.

Yes, this is me deciding to not be a complete ass, and throwing you research people a bone. The funny part is that we agencies jump for joy when the work has ‘tested well with the target market.’ But truth is we shouldn’t be happy because all it means is that we’ve given them ‘the familiar’. But, I digress.

I started out this article saying that it was more of a rant than anything, but I think it is more of a message to creatives. I’m no guru but I know one thing for sure, and that is: what we do is not a science. You can’t quantify or measure it with charts and graphs, so let’s try allow as little as possible of that to happen. Sorry research guys. That was a shot at you.

I’ll tell you this much; if the guy who came to the focus group only because he heard that snacks would be served gets to be the determining factor on whether I make my ad or not just one more time, someone is getting shot.

There’s great turmoil in the world of creative agencies. Marketeers are under pressure, budgets are low and it’s still uncertain whether or not the budget for the second half-year will even be available. But never mind… the agency world has always had it’s highs and lows, and hopes are high that a little life will be breathed back into the budgets in 2013, allowing us to dismiss the current climate as a temporary blip.

Agency turnover seems to be the problem, but that’s just a symptom. The underlying cause is agency structure. Every agency is screaming out that all sectors need to change. However, the changing technological, media and consumer climate has equally major consequences for the agency sector, and the necessary changes are not being made.

LINEAR AGENCIES

Most agencies – especially the ‘old guard’ agencies – have a very old-fashioned organisational structure which dates back to just after the Mad Men era. Let’s call it ‘linear thought’. Marketeers give their briefing to the accounts department, who pass it on to the strategist, if there is one (strategists have been hard to sell in recent years). Once the strategist has contributed his two cents, the creative team swings into action. Subsequently, the studio sets up all the materials in conjunction with other outsiders such as photographers, illustrators, constructors etc. Alternatively, we start shooting but the studio is only allowed to create the bumper.

This is how a huge number of agencies work. They use linear processes that are easy to manage and help maintain the ‘cutting edge’. The different stages flow together seamlessly and every team produces the desired result at the specified time, resulting in full schedules for everyone involved. This approach is effective, as linear processes are well-organised, adjustable and manageable. Or at least, they were.

FROM PRUSSIANS TO PARAMILITARIES

These days, there is no one person who has insight into all aspects of the agency. The old guard of agency directors can no longer draw upon past glories. The changes in technology, media and consumer behaviour have ensured that past success is no guarantee for future success. The old-fashioned structures are incapable of top-down management as they are unaware of how to move with the times in their marketing. The old, creative-oriented directors are flying blind.

The old-guard agencies need to make a change. They need to organise themselves less like the Prussian army and more like paramilitaries: small groups of individuals who appear as if from nowhere to solve problems together. After all, plans change every day, scope is a regular problem and the often-understaffed studios are frequently unable to implement the best solutions. But this is natural. Everything’s changing, and everything is new. This is what marketeers are looking for and it’s the way the world is going. You have to reconsider your revenue model, otherwise you won’t last long in the new world of marketing.

CREATIVE STRATEGISTS AND STRATEGIC CREATIVES

Within the new agency structure, the key to success is creative strategists and strategic creatives. They represent the very heart of the agency, and they are where magic and mechanisms combine. After all, every cross-media solution for a marketing problem requires some magic and damn good mechanisms.

Agencies have too few creative strategists. Smaller agencies with around 20 employees usually have just one strategist, and usually not a creative strategist. That’s far too few. Within a non-linear agency, you need three or four strategists: creative strategists with a clear view of the entire media landscape. Strategists who can think mechanically in order to foresee whether cross-media campaigns will work in practice. Strategists who can strike the perfect balance between paid, owned and earned media. And most of all, strategists who, together with a creative team, can use their newfound insights from continued social research, which make rough diamonds sparkle within a matter of minutes.

However, creative strategists are not infallible. All too often, they end up doing the work of the creative team. At times like these, you need adaptive creatives with strategic skill. Creatives, who are not afraid to share ideas or let others enrich them. They are a rare breed. They are either creative directors who spend too much time in account meetings, or they are new to the trade and still need to be molded into the complete professional.

The landscape is changing. Agencies need to evolve and embrace an adaptive organic structure. Because an adaptable structure ensures future turnover and exceptional campaigns.

I sense we are now arriving at a place where everyone understands that it’s about co-existence, it’s not one or the other. But beyond this understanding value – according to clients – still lay with the “Crazy Ones.” People who were prepared to be courageous and inspiring with their brands when they often are hamstrung with reality.

I had a few beers recently with my friend Andy Wardlaw, who runs a consultancy called Congregation Partners. Andy and Matt Wells, who founded it, are born from the world of digital and tech-funded start-ups. They have never worked in an ad agency. Yet when I started talking about George Lois and the influence he has on both myself and Neil Dawson, my business partner, Andy put his hand in his bag and pulled out George’s book. This is what marketing of the future is all about. Common ground and admiring the same things.

In the film “Art & Copy,” Lois tells a brilliant story of being on a TV show in the States. A guy from JWT was there trying to explain advertising. After ten minutes of mumbo jumbo, the host looks at George – who is rolling his eyes and about to fall asleep – and asks what the matter is. George replies, “I don’t know what business this guy’s in but I am in the poison gas business. Advertising should make you choke, make your eyes water, make you feel sick.” That is as good an articulation as I have ever heard.  The clarity of his objective vs. what the other guy was talking about is both striking and brilliant.

We all sit around in the very same meetings everyday whilst a bunch of people that have no clarity and no insight submerge the agency. You have to be sooooo careful who you let in to your business because getting people to have as singular an objective as George takes years of work and courage every day to live it. Getting people to come in and submerge that with mumbo jumbo is not hard to do.

Social media has transformed my leisure time and I love it. But in business, it’s a mess. There are constant conversations about earned media yet the reality of it is, the most powerful earned media is people talking about stuff face to face. Which has gone on forever. Earned media is actually bought media, because the majority of online campaigns now require a huge investment to get the right level of views and “likes,” and usually run in online and offline media. It’s a game which is only sustained by its lack of transparency. It’s not earned; it is bought. Lets call it what it is. Social media gives everyone a trumpet to blow. Social media gives brands a trumpet to blow and, I guess, ears to listen to what’s coming back. Lovely. But what’s it worth?

George Lois didn’t give his clients a trumpet; he gave them a massive big fat super-gun. That is worth a lot. It really is worth an awful lot. Anyone who joins an ad agency of any repute needs to understand this, love it, enjoy it and champion it. Whatever department. Too many agencies are selling people trumpets. Useful for the last post, I suppose. It won’t make much of a crater but it will do a good job of annoying the neighbours.

You know when someone arrestingly catches your attention?

You hear of them or you see them, but you don’t know them at all. You don’t have their number, their email, their address or any known way to contact them.

Yet you know you must connect with them and the hunt begins. Nothing will stop the hunter from finding “The One.”

Or in this case, “The One Designer,” better known as “Mak.” Jonathan Mak Long is a young second-year communications and design student from Hong Kong who gained international online notoriety last year with his Steve Jobs tribute design following the Apple icon’s passing.

The hunter looking for The One Designer was Chief Creative Officer of Ogilvy & Mather China Graham Fink, who with the help of his assistant, called every college in Hong Kong to find Mak after admiring his Jobs tribute design.

“He’s just 20,” Fink said, “and after I flew down to Hong Kong to meet him, I immediately liked his work.”

After finally connecting with Mak and reviewing his portfolio, Fink vowed to keep in touch in him and find a way to work together.

The opportunity soon came with Coca-Cola and one simple brief: “Sharing a Coke.” Playing a part in the Coca-Cola Company’s global marketing campaign, “Open Happiness,” Ogilvy China’s brief aimed to bring the celebration of sharing a bottle of Coke to China’s market, but in a uniquely iconic way. Fink presented the brief to his internal teams at Ogilvy and also asked Mak to take a stab.

What Mak came back with was also “The One”: but this time his design was “The One” with the solution for the Coca-Cola brief.

The #CokeHands design uses and celebrates two of Coca-Cola’s iconic images, the “Dynamic Ribbon” and the “Contour Bottle.” But most importantly, it uses the images in way that brings dynamic energy to the simple brief, as two hands pass a bottle of Coke between them.

Fink was most pleased with the hyper-minimalistic design, meant to stand out amongst a cluttered market in China, but more so with the poster’s universal global appeal. For now, the design debuted in Shanghai in outdoor posters across bus shelters and elevators across the city.

Fink, profiled yesterday on IHAVEANIDEA, is one of the industry’s absolute finest and most interesting creatives, who has proven that he will go much further than just the distance for his work. Fink is extremely devoted to finding and nurturing young creative talent – two of the best examples being his hunt for Mak and his integral leadership in bringing Portfolio Night back to China for the benchmark tenth edition of the event.

Fink and Ogilvy China, who are hosting Portfolio Night in both Shanghai and Beijing, will offer four internships in each city to the juniors with the best portfolios at each event on May 23. Fink has also allotted a small amount of tickets specifically for talent abroad to attend the event in Shanghai or Beijing, while reserving the rest of the spaces for local Chinese talent.

Track the buzz about #CokeHands and chime in on Twitter, view more images of the #CokeHands work on Flikr and keep up with Mak’s next move on his Tumblr site. Could his next move be into the advertising industry? It’s definitely possible.

“I’ve told him there is a job at Ogilvy at the end of his course should he choose to want to go into advertising and design,” Fink said.

Stay tuned.

There is no escaping it.  This tech-ed up world we’re living in has made dodging the marketer’s message nearly impossible.  So much so, that as consumers we are all growing increasingly complacent to the onslaught of branded messaging we confront on a daily basis.  As a student of the VCU Brandcenter, a microcosm of self-proclaimed brand junkies, the experience may be slightly different.

We love this stuff.  Probably too much.

I remember well the first assignment I received in a course on brand engagement.  At the professor’s instruction, I was to record in a journal every brand that I consciously engaged with during one single day.  Simple, right?  My mind was fried by the time I polished off my Cheerio’s.  There I sat, on my Ikea couch, watching a TV series on Netflix, streamed via Roku, on my Panasonic television, while checking email on my iPhone and devouring a bowl of Big G cereal.  All before 8 AM.  And while I thought I was being particularly clever recognizing all this hardcore brand engagement, I was amazed to see my list of brands dwarfed by many of my fanatical peers.  I think the winning list included nearly 200 brands.  In one day.

While the Brandcenter may represent somewhat of an anomaly in that regard, it’s in the context of this observation that I can’t help but express some surprise at how infrequently people consider themselves among the most important brands in their life.

Whether we like it or not, we all act as our own personal brand.  And much like the popular brands we all love (and love to hate), the things we do and say are often trumped by how others perceive us.  It may seem unfair but that’s the way it works.  Don’t think you’re that petty?  Well, examine your own purchasing behavior and you may see similar patterns.  How many times have you been torn between products and chosen the one wrapped in sexier packaging?  Are you more willing to take a risk on a new product because of its cool logo or recognizable brand?  Of course you are.  We all are.

Managing a brand is hard work and requires a high level of commitment.  One advantage that we, as individuals, have over corporate brands is agility.  If you’re unhappy with your current brand, simply change it.  It can be as simple as minding your wardrobe, tweaking your vocabulary or reinvigorating that limp handshake.  Obviously these small transformations represent the most basic of personal branding tactics.  However, implementing a more strategic branding initiative doesn’t have to be as complex as it seems.  Look at world famous brands like Coca-Cola, Nike, and Levi’s – sure they have brand values.  A brand voice.  An essence.  And while all of this may feel very intangible on the surface, each of these brands are rooted in something very real.  A passion and dedication to their respective craft that transcends the product itself.

This same concept can be applied with equal magnitude to shaping your own brand.  Find your passions, what you want to stand for and inject them with your own personality.  Be fluid.  Be flexible.  These things change over time and your brand should evolve in parallel.  Just keep in mind that there is no right answer and no real risk.  No ROI to track.  No shareholders to please. Just you: an army of one.

I recently had the opportunity to attend the annual recruiting event for graduating Brandcenter students.  It is attended by hundreds of the world’s top ad agencies on the hunt for the industry’s hottest young talent.  It was truly something to behold.  For two days, the school was transformed into a gallery of brilliant personal branding.  I didn’t see a thing that wasn’t astonishingly unique and creative.  The Brandcenter Class of 2012 set the bar high – not only for future graduates of the Brandcenter, but for personal brands everywhere.

So whether you count yourself among the graduates plunging into the workforce for the first time this May, or those simply trying to ignite and propel a prosperous career, know that the secret to success may be more manageable than you thought.  I’ve found that the best way to be treated like a junior is to act like one.  If you want to be perceived as a professional you can just as easily be one of those, too.  But that’s the beauty of being your own brand manager; you call the shots.

Michael Weiss

I have a confession to make. I love TED. I may go so far to say that I am infatuaTED with it. But lately, I feel a bit overstimulaTED with so many TED videos flooding my inbox and Facebook wall. And while I am exciTED by the amount of TEDx events there are, I feel wholeheartTEDly that the TED brand is in trouble. Why? To put it simply: The TED market is saturaTED.

During the month of May there will be nearly 40 TEDx Conferences happening in the United States alone. Is it too much? I don’t know. Are there really that many ideas worth sharing? Probably not.  But more importantly, are there that many people who can give a well crafTED and stimulating TED talk? Nope.

And therein lies the problem.

If the quality of the TED talker begins to equal that of the standard conference presenter, then the brand will begin suffer. While reading slides and offering dispassionate content with no story whatsoever may be tolerated at conferences and in boardrooms, it is not allowed or expected at TED or TEDx events. What makes a TED talk so impactful is the TED Talker’s wonderful combination of content and performance. The best TED talks are engaging and entertaining as well as educational and inspirational.  TED talkers are the best of breed. They possess the necessary skill set to weave a story while keeping the audience interested and wanting more. Some of the greatest TED talkers could read a diner menu and it would still be amazing simply because of their ability to deliver.

The TED talk is different.

The TED talk is unique.

The TED talker is special.

As a speaker coach, I have begun to notice something going on in the speaker industry.  The TED talk seems to becoming the standard by which ALL presentations are being measured. Many of my clients come to me and say, “I have to present at a conference – I have 15 minutes and they want it to be like a TED talk.”  Why is that? Because everyone knows that TED talks are engaging, entertaining and inspiring. And they are often delivered by well-educated and passionate individuals who have done amazing things with their lives.

Because of TED, the audience’s expectations are… well… rising. It doesn’t matter if it’s a simple meeting or a conference Keynote, people want engaging presentations. They demand to be inspired. They expect to be blown away. But, there is a time and a place for everything. And sometimes you need to talk about excel spreadsheets in a breakout session at a conference or roll your up your sleeves and get geeky with data and PowerPoint slides. What I am trying to say is that sometimes a TED-like talk may not be appropriate for a certain setting.

What TED has taught us is that today’s audiences – whether in the conference room or the auditorium – expect high quality delivery from the speaker. They want their speakers to be polished and engaging. They want to learn. They anticipate a grand performance. The greatest orators have an innate skill that makes them exceptional. Yet, with some work, each and every one of you can improve and elevate your speaking skills. Now, can each of you become a TED talker? Truth be told, not everyone is capable of giving a TED-like talk. I equate it to the “you’re so funny, you should be a comedian” comment.  Not every funny person can do stand-up. Nor can everyone who has a decent voice win American Idol. It’s the same for speakers.

But it is not so much a person’s speaking skills as it is his or her subject matter. Not every story is an “idea worth sharing” on the TED or TEDx stages.

I am a supporter of TED and TEDx. I have been lucky enough to be on a TEDx stage four times in the past year. I coach TEDx Talkers at Speaker Boot Camps as well as in private sessions. The hardest part of my job is not telling someone they are an inadequate speaker; because I believe everyone can learn to be successful on stage. The hardest part is telling someone that his or her subject matter is not TED worthy. That is something we all need to accept.

We need to keep the TED talks for the TED stages; to keep them extraordinary and special; to make sure they remain riveting, mind blowing, emotional and utterly unique. If we do that, then the TED brand will remain intact; if we don’t then what’s so special about a TED?

Julia Casale
Chief Marketing Officer
Casale Media

We deliver more than one billion banner ads daily at Casale Media and, as you might imagine, a whole lot of advertising artwork flows through our platform.  We’ve seen it all: the good, the bad and the ugly. A big part of the work we do for clients involves monitoring the impact of every campaign that we run in accordance with the brand’s objectives and, in our experience, it’s the quality of creative used that can make all the difference.

Over the years we’ve accumulated quite a bit of insight into what works and what doesn’t when it comes to top performing online banner ads. Amazingly, that which is pretty doesn’t always perform.

It does not matter if you are a graphic designer, a flash developer or a creative director, nor whether you’re knee deep in creating artwork for online banner ads, or are just looking to get started, the job of a creative is a tough one. Your work needs to strike a balance between your personal passion for design and the goals and wants of your client.

Below you’ll find our top 5 tips for creating banner ads that not only look good, but generate bottom line results that will delight your clients to no end:

1.) Include a prominently displayed call-to-action.  “Click here”, “learn more”, “subscribe”, “order now… including a strong call-to-action in your banner design may seem obvious, but it really works.  It reminds your audience to interact with the advertisement.  Do you want them to click through?  Fill out a survey?  Play a game? Activate a video? Don’t assume that your audience will “get it” on their own. A banner ad can never be too obvious. Spell out what you want them to do with a visible message that is easy to understand.

2.) Evaluate the ad from your audience’s point of view.  While it is important to maintain the “elements of design” and produce a well composed banner, it is also important to think about how your audience will react to the overall experience.  Where will they look first?  How much text is too much?  What colours will stand out best?  What size font is legible?  All of these little components and more add to a richer user experience, and thus a more effective ad.

3.) See the forest for the trees.  If the ad campaign you are working on contains multiple ad units that are intended to run in tandem on the same page, make sure that you take the time to view all your ads playing together in a single view (as they would appear while in flight).  Check for visual flow, harmony between colors, messaging consistency, font consistency, etc.  Tandem ads should build upon (not compete against) each other.

4.) Check for visual consistency beyond your project’s scope.  If you are designing banners that are intended to run as part of a larger cross-channel campaign, whenever possible make sure that you refer to other campaign assets (e.g. print ads, billboards, commercials) to ensure that your project harmonizes well with the overall campaign experience.

5.) Triple-check, then check again.  Is the copy spelled correctly?  Is the client’s logo crisp?  It doesn’t matter if these elements were provided to you – it is vital that you conduct a thorough quality check of the assets you are working with up front to avoid unnecessary rework and client disappointment.
Now that you’re armed with tips for developing amazing display ads, why not put your creative prowess to the test?  The Engagement Directive is a global competition open to creative newbies and pros worldwide with up to $15,000 in cash prizes to be won. Learn more at www.engagementdirective.com and be sure to submit your entry by June 1st.