It takes two...

It takes two...

During the Digital Signage Expo, there were tremendous learning opportunities from many disciplines in the industry. I was excited to attend “The Advertising Agency Perspective on the Digital Out-of-Home Industry” and hear the thoughts on the agencies’ role in out-of-home directly from that side of the fence.

Instead of an hour of constructive discussion, it seemed to expose the differences that are shaping this young relationship between agencies and venues, with a few biting opinions from the panel and some tension-filled questions from the audience. Listening to the both, and based on my own experience, I see a few major sticking points on both sides. But I also see a way to work toward a partnership.

Agencies lack or fear the loss of control over media planning and lack the resources to understand the amount and complexity of the venues where their clients want to promote. Because there is such a desire for creative customized for each and every venue, the risk of too many versions or diluting the creative for the sake of a venue logo or slogan is prohibitive to the basic nature of the creative – create amazing advertising for the masses that will target the demographic. (I’m willing to bet many non-drinkers think the Bud Light ads are funny, too.)

One panelist said agencies support venues going straight to the client to develop the strategy for advertising in the venue with the agency coming in for “product development” after discussions have started.

This is a major mistake by the agency. If the client sees a speed-to-market opportunity, the agency will be bypassed. Period. I know this. I have done it. The agency is not happy.

Venues want unique content that differentiates them from every other venue, but do not want to invest in resources to either educate the agency on the brand strategy of the venue or plan and manage the execution of the creative. Most venues simply want the ad and the money that comes with it. This is understandable. Until “metrics” became the topic du jour, most retailers did not concern themselves with them. They knew their CPM or traffic and handed over a rate card. But with audience measurement and demographic definition, the need for proper measurement has put pressure on retailers to teach back their audience metrics. This work takes valuable resources from the normal retailing business model of selling stuff. In this economy, it’s even harder.

So what do we do?

Ashley Swartz, CEO of North America Ag8, provided some outstanding perspective, offering several points from understanding how media planners operate down to understanding the retail brand, saying that “Digital is a dialogue, not a monologue.”

Here are three things both venues and agencies can do. Right now.

First, understand this won’t happen overnight. It’s easy to take the client’s money if they come straight to me, but that is not a good plan. Venues are not “creative,” and in many cases do not know these clients as well as the agencies. The client has a strategy as well, and if the agency has been working on the product for a while, they can only benefit the end result. If you ask some corporate people how long it takes to make a 30-second commercial, the answer you’ll hear is, “30 seconds.”

Both agencies and venues tend to worrying about tomorrow’s statistics instead of focusing on today’s customers. With the emergence of metrics like OVAB’s, there is a tremendous fear of failure that prevents a lot of trial and error; grass roots efforts that could provide a foundation for building solid statistical measurement. A lot of people are waiting to jump into this before they see the metrics defined. But there are customers walking through the stores today. Those customers are not waiting for the metrics to find the right product or service.

Second, start talking about this tonight. There is simply no reason that phone call (or text message?) should not be made. The sooner the discussion starts, the sooner the differences are understood and the relationships are built. Spirited discussion is key to sustainable relationships. Venues need to share what they know to help the agency do the best job it can managing expectations, and agencies need to embrace the networks and develop great creative.

Finally, listen. I have learned as much about effective communication for my audience from the creative minds at the agency as I have from the creative minds inside my own building. While venues may have the book on the audience, a TV screen hanging in their environment is still a relatively new thing, and most don’t understand what really goes on behind the screen to produce strong creative. And with the effort to keep the TV from looking like “TV,” the desire for targeted and effective promotion is paramount.

Since managing Best Buy’s in-store program, I have worked through just about every scenario with and without the agency as a partner. I have learned two things from this: Almost every time the agency is my partner, the creative is better; and I still get my money from the client for the ad buy.

One Response to “How Retailers and Agencies Can Work Together”

  1. Jeff McQueen says:

    Why are we looking at this non-traditional media in a traditional manner? There is another business / promotion / marketing / content distribution model that seems worth examining, and in fact may be more directly applicable and appropriate for OOH.

    Agencies can and will continue to play a role – on a national and brand-think level, but in terms of day to day and maintaining brand stewardship, let’s look at the network / cable television in-house model.

    This model maintains top down branding and corporate direction, while also remaining fluid, economical, regional, and even local… like OOH.

    Let me further elaborate using the example of Fox Sports Net , or ESPN, as they tend to focus on regional broadcasting within the national landscape. The “mothership,” aka the network headquarters, creates network advertising and branded advertising “content” on a daily basis via in-house creative divisions.

    The in-house produced product adheres to overall brand related issues, and then is further customized by in house creative directors, motion designers, writers and producers. In House productions are then taken one step further and material is “localized,” utilizing available graphic toolkits, the content is put it up on the bird… and off it goes, into Milwaukee, Detroit, Oklahoma City, etc.

    Voila – market specific promotion that works within the overall national branding direction, at a scalable OR national level.

    This model has worked for years, allows the flexibility for in-house folks to go “out of house,” when more firepower and creative skills are required, and yet adheres to brand guidelines. It also allows a laser focus on a project by project basis, while keeping brand stewardship in house, even if the overall direction was defined at some point by a clever and smart agency.

    Thanks to shared goals, it is also extremely fluid when it comes to partner-based campaigns, maintains overall network brand, and allows content distributors to strictly focus on doing their job of distributing customized content to the appropriate defined markets.

    This model is neither inclusive, nor exclusive to the agencies – and keeps the goal and bottom line dollars and overall branding direction where it should be – with the retailer, and a talented staff of brand communicators.

    Food for thought – is this network / cable model worth further considering?

Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

© 2010 Experiate