‘Agencies need to be more discerning about award entries’

My first question is to you, Mike and Ralph. Are creative awards an indicator of the level of creativity in a country? And if so, from the entries that you have judged, what do you think is the state of Indian creativity?

Mike Florence (Florence): To give some context, from the work I have seen in the UK, America or globally, at Cannes, the entries here are as good as any. A lot of work goes into it and it takes time to find the gems, but the cream always rises to the top. The work here is good enough to play out on the world stage, and some of the work we saw in the last three days, will shine at other global awards ceremonies too.

Ralph Barnett (Barnett): I totally agree with Mike. There is a great standard and calibre of work. I am not sure if the depth of work is quite there compared to other markets, but certainly there is a great future for fantastic work that will do well internationally.

Balki, I ask this question because at the Goafest Abbys, there was concern that work this year is not at par with international standards. What do you think? 

R Balki (Balki): Like Mike said, the percentage of the gems -- or the kind of work we have been talking about -- is always the same at most award shows. It is all about sifting through a lot of stuff before you get there. Also, I do not think all the agencies are represented, either at the Abby or at Kyoorius. So, that is also not a true reflection of the work that has happened through the year. The work that has been entered at these award shows, is quite different from what has really (been done). 

Balki: Not at all. There is a lot of work [happening] in a country that appeals to [the sensibilities] of a certain country which are not sent to international events because it would not have the same kind of significance to [an international] jury. I believe no awards show should be taken as an indicator of how good a country is or isn’t; the country’s work will speak for itself, and for the country. It is not to be taken as a benchmark or indicator of where that country stands in a global arena of creativity. 

Would you say an international award is truly indicative of the work of a certain country? 

Balki: Not at all. There is a lot of work (happening) in a country that appeals to (the sensibilities) of a certain country which are not sent to international events because it would not have the same kind of significance to (an international) jury. I believe no awards show should be taken as an indicator of how good a country is or isn't; the country's work will speak for itself, and for the country. It is not to be taken as a benchmark or indicator of where that country stands in a global arena of creativity. 

We know you have your views about the judging processes followed at the creative awards. What is your view of the judging that happened for the Kyoorius Awards? You were in D&AD recently…

Balki: I think we all are struggling. All of us would like to have an ideal awards show that truly reflects how advertising should be done and what is the most creative solution for a particular problem that we face. I don’t think it is possible to ask a jury to be in a room for four days, view 2,000 entries and actually think deeply about each and every entry. It is a difficult, complex process, so you do some things. For instance, you make it so expensive [to enter] that agencies spend a lot of time thinking about what is truly great and should be entered. Today, people just send a lot of things which I do not think should even be put up on agency walls…. Maybe the barriers are not there 

Mike, do you agree?

Florence: I do. I don’t think that these awards shows are best indicative of all award shows that people want to be seen entering. Sometimes, even if the quality of work is not good enough, they enter anyway, which makes it harder for us judges to sift through. However, when you do find gold, it really stands out. So after three days of judging, when we were wondering where all the good stuff was, we came back to the shortlist, and there was really some good stuff there. But I do think when agencies across the world enter for awards, they need to take a bit more pride in what they send in, rather than enter it for the sake of entering.

Ralph, what do you think? The sentiment is that awards are indicative of a country’s creative prowess. But does that mean if you win, you actually have it in you in terms of creativity and talent?

Barnett: I feel you’ve got to look at awards shows to celebrate creativity, whether in India, England or Australia. And that, possibly, got me excited this year to come along and see the cultural context and the uniqueness of the Indian market, and I am looking at it through that lens. I do not want to look at it as one country’s power of creativity versus that of another. For me, it is just a celebration of how India is truly creative.

Any significant trends that you might have spotted from the work that you have seen in the digital category?

Barnett: One of the trends that I am seeing, is a real development in branded content using the beautiful Indian storytelling capability, and using it to enhance really powerful messages that are being pushed.

Balki, what do you think? Any significant trends that you have noticed?

Balki: In India, it always happens to us. I would like to share something with you. Today, the way we write case studies, and how many million people are affected, is a big thing; it is a trend. We know that certain kinds of work appeal to juries. We are using Indian awards shows to test out what will stand a good chance in awards show [abroad] and I have seen that happening a lot. And, I see a lot of rural communication.

Communication for the unfortunate or somebody helpless or some victim or some very big social cause, that is being tackled from a very urban perspective using a rural subject to appeal to a globe that has a certain view on social issues. I do not know how many rural people are seeing this; I think it is urban people, talking to urban people about rural subjects, and trying to impress each other about a social cause. I see that in a lot of (people) and it is a very dangerous trend because again, we are creating a lot of communication thinking this is what global audiences would like.

And do you think social-cause advertising is created for doing well on the awards circuits?

Balki: Sometimes. Actually, most of the time. There are some which are genuine, but most of the time, yes.

In the process what has happened, is that the core idea of advertising, on building a brand and it reflecting the philosophy of a brand, has been given the go-by…

Balki: Actually that is happening on the side, and it is slightly beneath our dignity to say ‘yes, I did that ad, it is just a 30-second spot’. Everything has become larger than life but actually on the ground, it is not larger than life. It is one small village which is taken for a case study; it has not affected more than 20 people, any of the activation, and the only thing those people see is still the ad. But you are trying to make it much bigger than what it is.

Mike, in the media business, everybody looks for out-of-the box solutions. Did you find out-of-the box stuff in the entries that you viewed?

Florence: I saw it in some cases. First, I do agree with the (earlier) point, and I do see people in the UK, and around the globe, use cause-related marketing to catch the eye of judges. I do see opportunity to use advertising as a superpower in India because there are problems out here, such as the situation of women or pollution (that require drawing attention to). Actually, a brand can help make the world better. Sometimes advertising makes the world worse, and it can be used to make it better. The Ariel ‘Share the load’ work one, I thought, was great because it is a cause-related issue. In terms of media, back to your question, how they innovated, the experiential activities, all of it was great. I was thinking a very realistic campaign ticked all the boxes.

In terms of the media, what we find is it needs the active participation from media entities and media owners to help with processes. From the entries that you saw, did you find that media vehicles were actively participating in the business?

Florence: I think in some cases, it is more on the broadcasters’ side -- good collaborations with TV stations such as Zee or Star or whoever they were collaborating with. However, as an industry as a whole, sometimes there too much of reliance in the media world to hand over the reigns to some media entity to find selfless solutions. That is never going to happen. Collaboration is an overused word. What actually needs to happen is that agencies that are closest to the client, need to come up with ideas and how can they make it amazing and work together, and not say ‘we have this problem’ and ‘how can we help this’. You need to define the problem first, and I am sure with some of the entries that rose to the top, that must have happened. To answer your question, yes, I can see it, and while it is hard to pick that out in some of the entries, it is the way forward.

Ralph, we all know what is happening in digital. But in terms of creative, original work, did you see enough of it during this judging process? 

Barnett: There was a lot of originality. I would say there was a lot of digital innovation. Digital, as a medium, is difficult because it is always changing -- the way it is moving forward, browsers change, phones get manufactured by the day etc. So I think the creativity was more around that Indian idea of jugaad; the work around the hack to find creativity within existing digital platforms and channels.

Balki, there were over 100 entries in radio and print, but what actually got shortlisted were four in each. Is it a reflection of the kind of work that is being done in print and radio, or are they not doing enough work in these fields?

Balki: Print, definitely. Even the work that was shortlisted [in print], most of it seemed like it was created for awards, and 99 per cent of it has never been seen by any human being. It is really not worth discussing. People are not really focusing on print. With radio and digital, the thing that hit me was the duration of the commercial. Just because you have a space that you do not pay for by the second, there is such lengthy communication that can sometimes be a downer mainly for its duration. Some radio commercials are unbearable to hear by the time they get to the point; they are so long you lose patience. Forget judges, imagine [regular] people being forced to listen to that stuff and we have to listen to it. People are going to switch it off. Sometimes, they are 90 seconds, sometimes three minutes long, which is way too long.

Do you think the real reason is that there is not much top creative thinking happening in this medium?

Balki: No, it is not like that. There are cases where there is a fantastic brand idea, and mediums have been used effectively to communicate that. But I see a lot of entries -- unfortunately on ideas which are not part of the bigger brand ideas -- almost like standalone radio spots or standalone thinking. That is why they are pathetic in terms of creative thinking. Where they have been part of some fabulous ideas overall for the brand, I think some of them are very good.

We always talk about creativity versus effectiveness. But what, according to you, really matters for an ad? The fact it has done well at creative awards shows, or the fact that it does well for the client?

Florence: It has to have an impact. We need to remember the advertising is set in a business world and we are not pure artists; we are here to do a job for our clients. 

Balki, Lowe has been doing well at all the effectiveness awards. So what is your view on your achievement in terms of effectiveness versus creativity?

Balki: I am not for the effectiveness awards, or any awards. We, as an agency have taken a stance that we have not [participated in] any awards for the last 10 or 12 years. But yes, if somebody chooses to participate in any effectiveness awards, I have no issues with that. They were never seen as a part of the awards before, so I think it became a habit. But I have the same point of view for effectiveness awards; I think they are a night for fun and not to be taken seriously. The parameters [for judging] too are debatable. The purpose of creativity is to be effective. So this whole debate of effectiveness versus creativity is passé today.

Ralph, what about you?

Barnett: I view creative awards as a byproduct of great work. You should be focusing on delivering a great solution for your clients, and then the impact can be rewarded or awarded down the track at some awards show. 

One last question. Balki, we were all surprised that you accepted the invitation to be jury foreman of the advertising awards at Kyoorius.. The fact that you have seen these awards, the way the judging is conducted and such. would we now see the MullenLowe Lintas group participating in any of the awards?

Balki: No, and I’ll tell you why. Not for the reason that we some deep-rooted social issue about such things. It has worked for us. When you are handed a particular positioning in a market and it works for you, why would you want to change it, unless 15 other people appropriate that position? It is like any other brand, you just kind of play around with the game. This kind of game has worked for us. 

This edition of Conversations was also aired on Zee Business as part of BrandStand. Catch the video here.