When I started off in communications the agency was the monarch of all it surveyed. Media, market research, DM, planning was all part of the agency business. Specialists in each field sat under the same roof, operated under the same brand name and therefore there was synergy in the work produced. The tone, personality, task was also the same. And usually the client service guys were responsible for a thought through, well coordinated and synergistic strategy and execution.
Over a period of time with each function getting more complex and more mediums emerging and with an opportunity to make more buck, agencies got fragmented into creative, media, DM, Digital, PR, social media.... Each operated under a different brand name, each had its own bottom line to worry about and each wanted its recommendation to be followed by the client. As a result two things happened. One was that what was required for the brand took a back seat and what could get the agencies more revenues took the forefront. Secondly, the clients task became more complex as he had to now manage 2-3 entities simultaneously while driving all towards the same goal. Over a period of time this got more complex and I fear somewhere down the line the client too abdicated responsibility.
In my mind each of the communication partner lost a golden opportunity. Each worked under a very narrow spectrum as they were being compensated for just that much. No one seized the initiative of being the leader of the pack. Admittedly it was not an easy job but imagine the rewards if one partner had taken the lead. Since they were being paid to do just that much, they were happy not taking the extra step in leading.
The loser in all this is the brand. Synergies in the tone, personality and even task at hand went for a toss. So we have reached a stage wherein the digital agency is making viral films which are running on social media which are totally different in all respects to advertising films made by creative advertising which run on traditional media. Both the agencies have convinced the client that what they are depicting is right for that media and surprisingly the client buys this argument.
This is clear in the case of Honda Mobilio. About 2-3 weeks before launch the digital agency launched a series of viral films featuring Kapil Sharma, the host of a humour based show on satellite TV. The films had a tongue in cheek tone with Kapil in his usual style taking on politicians, indulgent socialite mothers.....and bringing out the features of the Mobilio pretty comprehensively. I would like to believe that the films were targeted at people like me who will be a major customer as well as consumer for the brand. It was very different from the run of the mill auto TVC's and in my mind fit into the Honda personality of being slightly different, slightly exclusive and slightly more premium brand.
Imagine my shock therefore when a few days ago I see a commercial, this time on traditional satellite media channels which was in complete contrast to the viral ads. Somebody at the creative agency had convinced the client that since this is an economical 7 seater they must show the full family in the ad, from grandparents to the third generation children extolling the virtues of the brand. And to make it "different", to show the entire target group of consumers ie the whole family rapping away the features of the Mobilio.
What was the client doing? Did he feel that these two works were portraying the same brand? Didn't any of the agency involve feel that the two campaigns were as different as chalk and cheese? Or maybe to "encourage competition" the client didn't share with one agency what the other was doing? If this is not abdication of brand responsibility then what is?
And the sad part is that given the halo around Honda brand and the good product that Mobilio is, the product will do very well in the market place, inspite of the confused communication. And both the agencies along with the client will pat each other on the back for a job well done. Maybe they will enter this for effectiveness awards too!
But what the brand custodians have to realise that continuing in this vein means slow chipping away of the brand equity. If Honda Mobilio can look and feel like Nirma and Surf excel in two different media then the chances are that it will end up being Rin. But will the client and the agencies smell the salt?
Over a period of time with each function getting more complex and more mediums emerging and with an opportunity to make more buck, agencies got fragmented into creative, media, DM, Digital, PR, social media.... Each operated under a different brand name, each had its own bottom line to worry about and each wanted its recommendation to be followed by the client. As a result two things happened. One was that what was required for the brand took a back seat and what could get the agencies more revenues took the forefront. Secondly, the clients task became more complex as he had to now manage 2-3 entities simultaneously while driving all towards the same goal. Over a period of time this got more complex and I fear somewhere down the line the client too abdicated responsibility.
In my mind each of the communication partner lost a golden opportunity. Each worked under a very narrow spectrum as they were being compensated for just that much. No one seized the initiative of being the leader of the pack. Admittedly it was not an easy job but imagine the rewards if one partner had taken the lead. Since they were being paid to do just that much, they were happy not taking the extra step in leading.
The loser in all this is the brand. Synergies in the tone, personality and even task at hand went for a toss. So we have reached a stage wherein the digital agency is making viral films which are running on social media which are totally different in all respects to advertising films made by creative advertising which run on traditional media. Both the agencies have convinced the client that what they are depicting is right for that media and surprisingly the client buys this argument.
This is clear in the case of Honda Mobilio. About 2-3 weeks before launch the digital agency launched a series of viral films featuring Kapil Sharma, the host of a humour based show on satellite TV. The films had a tongue in cheek tone with Kapil in his usual style taking on politicians, indulgent socialite mothers.....and bringing out the features of the Mobilio pretty comprehensively. I would like to believe that the films were targeted at people like me who will be a major customer as well as consumer for the brand. It was very different from the run of the mill auto TVC's and in my mind fit into the Honda personality of being slightly different, slightly exclusive and slightly more premium brand.
Imagine my shock therefore when a few days ago I see a commercial, this time on traditional satellite media channels which was in complete contrast to the viral ads. Somebody at the creative agency had convinced the client that since this is an economical 7 seater they must show the full family in the ad, from grandparents to the third generation children extolling the virtues of the brand. And to make it "different", to show the entire target group of consumers ie the whole family rapping away the features of the Mobilio.
What was the client doing? Did he feel that these two works were portraying the same brand? Didn't any of the agency involve feel that the two campaigns were as different as chalk and cheese? Or maybe to "encourage competition" the client didn't share with one agency what the other was doing? If this is not abdication of brand responsibility then what is?
And the sad part is that given the halo around Honda brand and the good product that Mobilio is, the product will do very well in the market place, inspite of the confused communication. And both the agencies along with the client will pat each other on the back for a job well done. Maybe they will enter this for effectiveness awards too!
But what the brand custodians have to realise that continuing in this vein means slow chipping away of the brand equity. If Honda Mobilio can look and feel like Nirma and Surf excel in two different media then the chances are that it will end up being Rin. But will the client and the agencies smell the salt?
No comments:
Post a Comment