Before planning.ro was launched there were a couple of logo proposals coming from a graphic designer. They say "wisdom". Or something. Never used them, but I thought they'd be fun to see.

Am fost la seminarul Effie de vineri de la World Trade Center. Acolo, au vorbit pe rand Narcis Horhoianu (Procter & Gamble), Felix Tataru (IAA), Razvan Matasel (Leo Burnett), Sorin Psatta (Graffiti BBDO), Afrodita Blasius (Bridge Communication), Ileana Serban-Parau (McCann) si Dan Petre (D&D Research). Am plecat spre final grabit fiind de o intalnire, sper ca n-am omis pe nimeni din cei care au luat cuvantul.

In mod evident, tema discutiei a fost festivalul Effie de anul acesta: Ce e nou? Ce e la fel? Cine e in juriu? Cum se completeaza un formular? Cum se face jurizarea?

Exista mai multe schimbari fata de editia precedenta (in bine, tind sa cred) in ceea ce priveste structurarea categoriilor. Aceste schimbari vor fi probabil anuntate cat de curand si pe site-ul festivalului. Ce mi s-a parut interesant cu privire la acest aspect este aparitia categoriilor: David vs Goliath (categorie in care se pot inscrie campanii pentru marci mai mici care au reusit performante in dauna unor marci mai mari, lideri de categorie) si Renaissance (categorie in care se pot inscrie campanii de succes ale unor marci care si-au revenit dupa un declin indelungat).

Dintre tips-urile despre “cum se scrie un formular” o sa le remarc pe cele prezentate de Razvan si ilustrate prin prezentarea formularului care a castigat Grand Effie-ul de anul trecut: Bergenbier. Astfel, reiau in continuare principiile prezentate de Razvan. S-ar putea dovedi foarte utile celor care au de scris un formular Effie:

REDUCTION. Scrie o prima versiune a formularului. Uite-te la ce ai scris si incearca sa elimini toate cuvintele care, odata scoase, nu influenteaza cu nimic sensul ideilor prezentate. Mai importante decat stilul sunt concizia si claritatea, juriul nu are foarte mult timp la dispozitie.

INTERESTINGNESS. Cu toate ca stilul nu este o prioritate intr-un formular Effie asta nu inseamna ca el trebuie sa lipseasca cu desavarsire. Intre doua case-uri similare va avea mai mari sanse de castig cel care reuseste sa surprinda foarte bine elementele interesante ale propriei strategii. Deci scrie ce a fost interesant atunci cand campania a fost gandita, scrie de ce agentia a considerat acea abordare interesanta. Daca nu reiese nimic interesant in legatura cu strategia sau creatia, unde e atunci meritul celor care au gandit campania? Daca nu ai schimbat nimic, argumenteaza de ce nu ai schimbat. Poate fi la fel de interesant.

BUILD SOME DRAMA. Desigur, la Effie conteaza in primul rand cifrele, rezultatele. Insa acestea capata semnificatie pentru ca sustin o provocare de marketing (marketing challenge) pe care echipa client-agentie trebuie sa o includa in formular. Cu cat aceasta provocare contine elemente de dramatism, cu atat creste sansa ca rezultatele sa fie interpretate intr-o lumina mai favorabila. Citand din Filantropica, am putea spune ca “mana intinsa care nu spune o poveste, nu primeste nimic”.

ISOLATE THE ADVERTISING EFFECT. Din ce stiu, in Romania nu se face modelare econometrica. Cu toate acestea, pe cat posibil, din datele disponibile, formularele Effie trebuie sa arate faptul ca cresterea in volume sau valoare a vanzarilor unui produs se datoreaza in primul rand comunicarii, nu unui alt element din mix-ul de marketing. Astfel, sectiunea “evidence of results” din formular ar trebui sa includa, pe langa date de vanzari, si cresteri ale unor indicatori de imagine sau orice alte dovezi si/sau indicii care sa probeze ca, intr-adevar, comunicarea a fost factorul decisiv.

DEFINE THE COMPETITIVE FRAME. Nu toti cei din juriu stiu subtilitatile tuturor categoriilor de produse din festival. De aceea, rolul celui care completeaza un formular Effie este acela a prezenta specificul categoriei si de a arata de ce a fost dificila, in contextul dat, indeplinirea provocarii de marketing.

HIGHLIGHT THE KEY POINTS. Faptul ca in formular nu se poate scrie in culori sau cu font-uri de dimensiuni mai mari nu inseamna ca unele lucruri nu pot fi scoase in evidenta. Sublinierea sau scrisul aldin (bold) sunt permise. Marcarea ideilor importante in acest mod poate simplifica procesul de intelegere a case-ului.

CLEAR AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES. Da, obiectivele trebuie sa fie masurabile (doh!), iar rezultatele trebuie sa corespunda obiectivelor mentionate.

BEHAVIOURAL CHANGE ... BUT NOT ONLY SALES. Repetand oarecum unul din rationamentele anterioare, trebuie sa nu uitam ca rezultatele nu trebuie sa faca referire doar la vanzari. Comunicarea functioneaza pentru ca determina o schimbare la nivel de comportament. Care e acea schimbare care i-a determinat pe oameni sa cumpere produsul? Avem cum sa o demonstram?

A GRAPH IS BETTER THAN 1000 WORDS. Pentru ca uneori se obtin foarte greu, atunci cand ai foarte multe date exista riscul sa consideri ca toate sunt la fel de importante si la fel de convingatoare. De cele mai multe ori insa nu sunt. E bine sa prioritizezi in functie de relevanta si sa nu pui in formular toate datele pe care le ai la dispozitie. Mai departe, cele mai importante date trebuie puse intr-un grafic (de obicei, e bine sa nu existe mai mult de unul sau doua grafice), care sa permita vizualizarea performantei atinse. Graficele sunt intotdeauna mai sugestive decat datele brute.

In alta ordine de idei, mai notez de la acest seminar existenta unei discutii sterpe despre “cine din agentie ar trebui sa scrie formularele Effie?”, unde partile adverse (pentru ca au existat) au argumentat pe de-o parte ca strategic planner-ii sunt cei care ar trebui sa completeze formularele, pe de cealalta parte ca account director-ii sunt cei mai potriviti. Eu ma gandesc ca suntem la un nivel al industriei in care nu prea conteaza cine le scrie, important e sa le scrie cineva (bine!). Evident, cred ca planner-ii le pot scrie cel mai bine (dar asta nu e neaparat o regula si este, desigur, o alta discutie).

Stefan anunta pe blog-ul sau un job opening pentru un post de Consumer Context Planner la Starcom. Detalii aici. Pentru a va tenta si mai mult pentru a aplica pentru acest job mentionez ca, pe langa faptul ca job-ul presupune un numar mare de proiecte de cercetare, planner-ii de la Starcom au acces la masa de fusball din cafeteria Leo Burnett.

I have to admit. I'm not really a Mac fan. I mean I like them a lot. They look far much better than PCs do, they are easier to use, they're somehow better with videos, music and graphics, they don't get viruses and they have a lot of advantages that I'm totally aware of. Yet, when it comes to working on something, I'd rather have a PC next to me. I think it's just that I feel more in control while working on a PC. I used to work on a Mac for a couple of months and, when something went wrong, I was totally lost. I didn't know what to do. But in spite of my preference for PCs, I really love these series of Mac ads that are now running on Yahoo. They're genius! They portray the Mac/PC personalities perfectly and they smartly talk about Mac's competitive advantages. See all of them.

Discutam acum ceva vreme cu prieteni care lucreaza in diverse agentii, fie locale sau multinationale. Evident, DA, stiam ca nu exista departamente de strategie peste tot. Cu toate astea mi s-a parut trist sa aflu ca in 2007 brief-urile de client ajung la oamenii de creatie printr-un simplu forward de la account executives sau account manageri. Mai grav este ca am aflat ca se intampla asta si in locuri unde exista departamente de strategie. De ce?

I was honoured to be tagged by John. I have no choice but to answer. Here are my “5 things about me that you didn’t know”:

1. My first (summer) job was in a hospital working for the anti-AIDS committee. I used to help build the database with the HIV infections cases. One month I’ll always remember.

2. I have a samoyed dog called Scity.

3. When I was little I entered the Theordor Aman museum in Bucharest without paying for the ticket. I faked that I was just playing with a ball inside the museum courtyard and when the warden went to drink some water I entered. He noticed me when I got out, but it was too late. :)

4. I’ve been admitted at the Faculty of Philosophy, but I dropped after two weeks (decided that I wanted to study communication).

5. The first creative brief that I wrote was for a tile producer.

I’ll tag Stefan Stroe and Dan Petre.

We have a new colleague in our planning department. His name is Adrian Chiuhan and he’s a Leo Academy graduate. Today it’s his birthday and we made him a planning t-shirt using a quote from a Merry Baskin interview (see photo). Russell’s “I have a lot of respect for junior planners” interview title may also be an option to help build self-esteem and confidence if put on a t-shirt. These are two new entries for the planning t-shirt thing.

As I’ve promised, here it is. A brand new video interview on account planning with John Griffiths. It has been recorded in Leo Burnett last summer (yeah, I know, it took too long) during John’s first visit, but I really think the content is timeless and quite interesting for planners. The interview has been launched as a special edition of IQadsTV so that more Romanian advertising people can see it. I thank the IQads team for supporting the effort and taking care of editing and everything. They did a great job! Of course, a lot of thanks go to John who agreed to be interviewed after a tiring training and just before the World Cup game between England and Portugal (I hope John doesn’t remember I made him miss the start of the game). Enjoy it!

Bogdana has asked me to announce that we have a planners’ meeting on Thursday at the already traditional place, Amsterdam Café, starting at 20.00 o'clock (I guess). Which is what I'm doing right now. We will be voting the best planner T-Shirt. Which reminds me that I already have a planner T-Shirt that I’ve received from my colleagues for my birthday in 2005. I’ll bring it with me. Be there or be square!

Dan Petre are blog. Si probabil deja multi dintre voi stiu asta. Insa ne facem si noi datoria sa anuntam. Nu de alta, dar cu siguranta vom avea ce citi. Mult succces, Dan!

This is the strategic planning department from Leo Burnett. Photo taken last year.

I must say that in the previous post with the cake I missed the point I was trying to make as Elena, my colleague, told me in a discussion we had. What that cake should have symbolized (because we ate it together) was the fact that we think that planners should work together in teams just like creatives do. We find that there’s a paradox within agencies regarding the way planning is supposed to function: creatives are supposed to come up with ideas while working together in teams, while planners are supposed to think of a strategy or to write a brief by themselves. Of course, you’ll say, that’s a very narrow view of the process of working inside the agency. The planner should be the facilitator of the team; he should inspire the others etc. He doesn’t have to be the one that comes up with ideas all the time. Moreover, you’ll argue, planners aren’t supposed to deliver the brief to creatives or write strategies by themselves. True. They should get people involved in discussions; they should start the thinking process in the agency etc. Advertising isn’t a linear process; working in advertising isn’t like working in a factory. I know all that! But let’s face it. How many times do account handlers tell you that they have the time for a long discussion about something that’s not yet on the agenda? How many times do art directors or copywriters really want to talk about and make ads based on the darkest hypotheses that lie hidden in your head? Not too often I think. My assumption is that when planners don’t find sparring partners inside their agencies a lot of promising hypotheses die just because sometimes there’s no one to encourage them. And I find the idea of planners working together in teams very motivating because this would result in an increasing number of ideas being talked about. Which I’m sure is profitable for any agency. Yet, I don’t really know how these planners working together should be named.