Pełna transkrypcja odcinka The Effectiveness Files: Lessons from the 2026 IPA Effectiveness Awards

uh you know creating packs to be used internally is those metrics. 00:02:49.039 --> 00:02:53.439 You cannot use general language, broad language, it has to be those metrics. 00:02:53.599 --> 00:02:58.080 So I think there's merit in independence and language precision. 00:02:58.960 --> 00:03:07.520 You were um very pointed just now, and indeed very funny, about our inclination to use the word investment. 00:03:07.840 --> 00:03:08.159 Yes. 00:03:08.319 --> 00:03:11.840 Uh uh almost as if it's proprietary to the advertising business. 00:03:12.479 --> 00:03:25.439 Yes, and I think I think that's something I feel very passionate about because you know I remember very clearly when I was working in advertising, everyone was saying, you know, but we're an investment, you know, if only they could see the light that we're an investment. 00:03:25.680 --> 00:03:27.599 And I think there's there's two issues with that. 00:03:27.759 --> 00:03:30.719 The first is that you know, this is a spin word. 00:03:31.039 --> 00:03:36.319 Um, so every single constituency within the company is also going in saying this is an investment. 00:03:36.400 --> 00:03:41.759 So I was talking about, you know, we've gonna put co-pilot on everyone's laptops, that's an investment. 00:03:41.919 --> 00:03:46.960 We're going to invest in more call centre staff so our call waiting times are are reduced. 00:03:47.039 --> 00:03:48.159 That's an investment. 00:03:48.319 --> 00:03:53.599 So these are all investments, you know, double click, double um quote. 00:03:53.840 --> 00:04:00.159 And as I was saying, you know, the marketing industry does not have the divine right to the word investment. 00:04:00.240 --> 00:04:01.919 Everyone is using this word investment. 00:04:02.000 --> 00:04:07.919 And then the other point I'm making is everyone is using this word investment to juice up the word cost. 00:04:08.639 --> 00:04:12.479 So they're sexing up the word cost with the word investment. 00:04:12.639 --> 00:04:14.479 Everyone's doing it, not just us. 00:04:14.639 --> 00:04:29.759 And so from a CFO point of view, and I know some people on the previous panel had a different point of view, but certainly we, and we spoke a long time getting our alignment on this between us and my fellow panelists on TUI, absolutely view it as OPEX. 00:04:29.920 --> 00:04:38.079 It's not CapEx because you know I can appreciate in their instance, they're a startup company, it may be a one-off cost to see how it goes. 00:04:38.240 --> 00:04:42.399 But what you want is you want it to be an OPEX because then it's recurring. 00:04:42.560 --> 00:04:44.720 Then every year you're going to be spending it. 00:04:44.879 --> 00:04:51.120 And I think that you know the other sort of language I introduced to the audience was good cost versus bad cost. 00:04:51.199 --> 00:04:53.360 So I think that's how we talk about it. 00:04:53.439 --> 00:04:59.360 Is this a good cost because it has a return versus a bad cost, which is cost you do want to get out of the business. 00:05:00.480 --> 00:05:03.360 I love listening to you about the corporate narrative. 00:05:03.759 --> 00:05:04.079 Yes. 00:05:04.480 --> 00:05:12.639 Tell me a little bit about what you meant by that and perhaps how it's the context for what you've done at nationwide and the context for our the further further. 00:05:13.439 --> 00:05:40.000 I think it's incredibly important because you know, for as much as you know we can be brilliant in terms of our marketing analytics and very precise in terms of our um, you know, the the metrics we're trying to uh um affect and all of the language we're using and it underpowered, we can do all of these good things, but if the corporate culture is not a culture that is looking to grow, it you're always going to be pushing water uphill. 00:05:40.160 --> 00:05:48.399 So I think it's really uh important, you know, particularly if you're in an agency world, to be very uh cognizant of the corporate narrative. 00:05:48.480 --> 00:05:58.000 And it's very easy to be cognizant because you obviously, you know, most companies will have you know results that, you know, interim results and and end-of-year results. 00:05:58.160 --> 00:06:00.560 You can see all of the corporate narrative around that. 00:06:00.720 --> 00:06:13.600 And I think you know that that's again was my recommendation to agencies, and you know, I I know there were some people for who work with uh grocery retailers in the audience, and I was you know specifically speaking to them. 00:06:13.680 --> 00:06:16.959 Um, that I do, you know, I think the grocery landscape is fascinating at the moment. 00:06:17.040 --> 00:06:20.399 So I I think knowing the corporate narrative is really helpful. 00:06:20.879 --> 00:06:25.680 Last Thursday, you were, well not you personally, that will come, I'm sure. 00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:26.800 Personal border. 00:06:27.120 --> 00:06:38.560 Your team was awarded a uh gold award and uh one of our sort of most prestigious uh special prizes uh for new learning for the nationwide campaign. 00:06:38.720 --> 00:06:43.920 Um I'm I'm I'm not I I I'd like you to describe it, perhaps anyone who hasn't even seen it. 00:06:44.000 --> 00:06:45.519 I think it'll be quite hard in the UK. 00:06:45.600 --> 00:06:54.639 But tell me about the campaign first and then tell me about the second half of the paper, which is to do with this independent investment. 00:06:55.600 --> 00:07:08.959 Yeah, so I think um what we do in the first half of the paper, and you know, first thing to say, Lawrence, you know, I cannot tell you how thrilled everyone is by that award, you know, is without question the uh you know the primus inter pares of any award. 00:07:09.040 --> 00:07:14.720 And I've never seen you know people at nationwide be so excited about anything that we've achieved in the last three years. 00:07:14.879 --> 00:07:16.560 So we're extremely grateful. 00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:35.680 Um I think you know what we set out to

do and what we talk about in the paper was the fact that nationwide had historically been seen as a building society and it had been successful as a building society, so very successful in the two markets of mortgages and savings, which building society is the most associated with. 00:07:35.759 --> 00:07:44.959 And what the issue with that is that those markets are very susceptible to fluctuations in interest rates because obviously the money you get in in savings you lend out in mortgages. 00:07:45.120 --> 00:07:49.360 So uh the smaller if interest rates are low, the gap becomes very low. 00:07:49.519 --> 00:08:06.399 So to create a sustainable um profitability model, you need to also be successful on banking and current accounts because you pay very little, if any, interest on those, so your margins are much greater if you're using those balances then to lend out on mortgages. 00:08:06.480 --> 00:08:10.720 So, but it wasn't just commercial, I think it's also about purpose. 00:08:10.800 --> 00:08:28.079 So Debbie Crosby, the CEO who came in, she was very um passionate about the fact that there was an opportunity, and this going back to corporate narrative, um, the government are very keen on mutuals providing an alternative business model in as many categories as possible. 00:08:28.160 --> 00:08:49.440 Um, and so you know what they want is that the full provision of retail banking is provided by a mutual as well as by the PLCs, and so that's why we've been very, from a purpose point of view, keen to get more into banking and why we acquired virgin money in order to be allow us to launch into business banking, which we'll be doing in the next 12 months. 00:08:49.600 --> 00:08:51.519 So there's a purpose reason. 00:08:51.679 --> 00:09:04.320 So having having said like the brief is to make nationwide more competitive to the banks, what we then did is to root our strategy in the banking category. 00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:14.559 So rather than the previous um positioning had been called building society nationwide, which was always only entrenching uh the shortcomings of nationwide. 00:09:14.639 --> 00:09:17.919 So what we said is we want to be banking but. 00:09:18.320 --> 00:09:20.320 And the key word there was the word but. 00:09:20.799 --> 00:09:23.759 So we were we were in the banking sector, but we were different. 00:09:23.919 --> 00:09:25.039 And how were we different? 00:09:25.200 --> 00:09:28.080 We were fairer, more rewarding, and for the good of society. 00:09:28.240 --> 00:09:40.639 And so what the campaign does is literally to depict that construct where we're saying we're in this category, so you so we therefore basically assume all the clothing of that category. 00:09:40.799 --> 00:09:56.799 So, you know, the TV campaign features an um archetypal CEO of what we call ANY Bank, any bank, um played by Dominic West, and he is uh up in his uh you know glass tower um somewhere in the Docklands. 00:09:56.960 --> 00:10:18.799 Not that any of our

competitors are headquarters in the Docklands, um, and uh so he and he he has a double act with uh his assistant who you know is continually pointing out to him some of the excesses and less customer-friendly behavior uh that his bank is is is um is is um you know propagating. 00:10:18.879 --> 00:10:23.120 And then what he does is to say, well, nationwide don't do it like this, they do it like that. 00:10:23.279 --> 00:10:28.720 And then he says, Well, nationwide are rubbish, um, they don't have shareholders, all my money needs to go to shareholders. 00:10:28.879 --> 00:10:42.320 So that was the sort of construct of the campaign, and that and I think you know, another conversation you and I have had, Lawrence, is you know, next Wednesday we'll be shooting our eighth TV ad in this campaign. 00:10:42.399 --> 00:10:51.440 So this is eight TV ads, and over the last three years, and not one of our competitors has had a campaign that has been continuous across that period. 00:10:51.600 --> 00:10:55.440 You know, loads and loads of campaigns launched, but none continued. 00:10:56.000 --> 00:10:56.639 Wow. 00:10:56.879 --> 00:11:00.559 Um listen to that story, it's like a reverse, it's a wonderful life. 00:11:00.720 --> 00:11:06.080 You're sort of turning from Potterville that that came to Bedford Falls or whatever it is. 00:11:06.559 --> 00:11:11.279 Um yeah, I love that, and I know there's way more than Telly, but that's just really helpful to hear about. 00:11:11.440 --> 00:11:32.879 Partly because wearing my IPA hat, that campaign evidences a lot of IPA learning, not just not just the power of consistency and repetition, which we've heard repeated today, but there's emotion, sure, there are brand very obvious brand assets, whether you treat him as one or your logo as one or humour. 00:11:33.200 --> 00:11:45.039 Tell me a little bit about the the code that you're working to, and perhaps within that, touch on how you've managed to change agencies halfway through that that run of eight. 00:11:45.360 --> 00:11:46.000 Yes, yes. 00:11:46.080 --> 00:11:56.000 So I think yes, I mean the uh taking the second point, the uh ad we are shooting next week will be Mother's Fourth, and the the previous agency NCA also did four. 00:11:56.080 --> 00:12:01.519 So so it will be um uh you know literally symmetrical in terms of the number of ads. 00:12:01.679 --> 00:12:06.559 So uh yeah, we with NCA New Commercial Arts, they conceived the campaign. 00:12:06.639 --> 00:12:17.679 I worked on it very intimately with them, and um, you know, because of a sort of corporate uh realignment that they did, um, we had to look elsewhere. 00:12:17.759 --> 00:12:31.279 And and you know, I was really nervous about this because you know, again, all my experience from advertising agencies was that they want to invent their own um campaigns, and uh and I knew we had to continue this campaign. 00:12:31.360 --> 00:12:37.519 And so my question was, could I get the very best agencies to want to continue to continue this campaign? 00:12:37.759 --> 00:12:47.200 And I remember going to see a gentleman that you used to work with, who was then my boss, and he had said, Oh, of course I would, but you need to speak to the Craig Director. 00:12:47.279 --> 00:12:58.399 So I had a coffee with uh chap called Felix Richter, and I said, you know, this is our situation, you know, if we go to pitch, you know, we we need to have agencies that prepare to continue that campaign. 00:12:58.559 --> 00:13:04.399 There are gonna be lots of other opportunities outside of the TV, but we need to continue this TV campaign because it's working really well. 00:13:04.559 --> 00:13:08.559 And Felix Richter said, Well, we we love it, we think it's we think it's brilliant. 00:13:08.720 --> 00:13:10.879 And then and every agency said the same. 00:13:10.960 --> 00:13:19.519 So all of the Leo Burnett, Uncommon, Neverland, every agency we spoke to uh had no problem continuing that campaign, which I was really surprised about. 00:13:19.840 --> 00:13:20.879 Yeah, I'm glad to hear it. 00:13:21.200 --> 00:13:36.080 And I I I dwell on it only because one of the dangers of a day like today is we just talk about measurement rather than making, yes, and even politics or the you know the human urge to change or all of those other things. 00:13:36.159 --> 00:13:36.879 So thank thank you for that. 00:13:36.960 --> 00:13:48.879 I mean I think the you know, just in terms of the construct of the campaign, what was you know definitely difficult in the first instance is it's not usual to spend you know 90% of the ad depicting the competition. 00:13:49.120 --> 00:13:52.320 And I think I was I was talking to uh the founder, Mr. 00:13:52.399 --> 00:14:09.519 Robert Saville, actually yesterday about this about you know, I think one of the big changes is is people, you know, the people less relying on takeout and inference, you know, because you know I think a lot of narrative is about you know, we've got these messages we need to land, or we've got to communicate these things. 00:14:09.840 --> 00:14:17.600 And you know, the the the the the ad we're about to shoot next week, the only reference to nationwide is nationwide don't do it like that. 00:14:18.080 --> 00:14:23.440 We don't even say what nationwide is, we don't say what they do, we just say nationwide don't think that. 00:14:23.600 --> 00:14:34.320 Um and all of the communication comes from the inference of people thinking in their head, and I think and I think that you know is proved incredibly effective for us. 00:14:34.879 --> 00:14:38.559 It's the um it's one version of completing the sentence, as well. 00:14:38.879 --> 00:14:39.440 Yeah, exactly. 00:14:39.519 --> 00:14:54.960 But I think I think it's I think you know, it was you know, I'm not sure this is for the podcast, but I just was having a great conversation with Robert Saverwist at lunch about different ways to communicate, which is why I really think the word creativity

is really unhelpful, because it's just like it's too abstract. 00:14:55.120 --> 00:15:05.360 Whereas I think if you went to people internally and say, you know, what's fascinating about communication is there's all these different ways to do it, and we're gonna look at them all, people would really engage with that conversation. 00:15:06.240 --> 00:15:11.759 So I know there was way more than the TV, and I know there's more than just the creative agency, obviously. 00:15:12.399 --> 00:15:24.000 But um, the the bit that thrilled the judges wasn't just oh, here's this campaign with its very precise metrics and its very obvious um end game. 00:15:25.279 --> 00:15:37.120 Uh it was that point halfway through the paper, which I compare to someone's the the uh IK Awards equipment watching Sinners where the movie suddenly kicks into a completely different space. 00:15:37.440 --> 00:15:46.559 The second half of that paper is all about the way you set up an independent I'm gonna call it a body, the put it the wrong word, I'm sure about your language. 00:15:48.639 --> 00:15:51.679 Sorry, let you you explain the second half of the paper. 00:15:51.919 --> 00:16:00.559 Sure, and I think I think I think we were very conscious that the point of the IPA effectiveness awards is to add to the body of learning. 00:16:00.720 --> 00:16:11.360 So I I think we weren't, you know, yes, we knew we had an effective campaign, but you know, it's a it's a classical campaign, it it's a uh it's an you know an established type of campaign. 00:16:11.519 --> 00:16:39.759 And I think what we what we thought about is what is the thing that we've done which would be most helpful and useful to the um body of knowledge, and and we thought the way that we had worked with the finance team, which we you know knew was a very topical issue, and you see you know, papers and articles and Ian Whisker every week opining about the relationship between uh marketing and finance, and that's something that we had been very sort of fastidious in setting ourselves up for success on. 00:16:40.000 --> 00:16:53.279 So that's why we focused on that, because we thought that would be the most helpful piece of learning for people who read that paper in terms of how to set yourselves up for success, in terms of the relationship between marketing and finance. 00:16:53.519 --> 00:16:57.919 So tell me about actually doing that because you that that's not just something you're reporting on. 00:16:58.000 --> 00:17:02.399 You you were there building it, I presume, breaking stuff in order to build it. 00:17:02.559 --> 00:17:21.519 Yes, so when we when we arrived, um the media agency were doing the uh the econometric modeling, so they they were using um game theory, um, but you know, there was very little trust in the process, so uh um, and it was as I say being done through the media agency. 00:17:21.599 --> 00:17:49.119 So the first thing we did was to say, you know, that needs to come out of the media agency, we need to set up, you know, you could, you know, as Claudia's just been talking about, work directly with you know his kind of company or work with Game Theory Direct, but um you know my boss Catherine and um my colleague Will Rossetti were very, very passionate about the fact that we we wanted to have the best marketing effectiveness capability of any company in Britain. 00:17:49.279 --> 00:17:50.480 That was the ambition. 00:17:50.880 --> 00:17:55.519 And uh and we said, who do we think currently has that title? 00:17:55.599 --> 00:17:57.200 And we thought Skye. 00:17:57.359 --> 00:18:01.359 Um, so you may argue spectators, but uh we thought Skye. 00:18:01.599 --> 00:18:13.759 And so we took the econometric team out of Skye and put them into nationwide, and they're all Greeks, which is uh not surprising when you think about the fact that uh that's where mathematics was invented. 00:18:13.920 --> 00:18:19.920 And these three Greeks econometric, you know, there's obviously a very easy gag of it's all Greek to me. 00:18:20.079 --> 00:18:32.640 Um, but uh we you know, so they and they were all classmates at the same university in Athens, so they all studied maths together in the same class, came to the UK, worked at Sky, and then we brought them over. 00:18:32.799 --> 00:18:42.319 So, you know, and and their boss is this guy, Chris Egan, and you know, I remember when we arrived, he said, I cannot believe people are actually reading my packs now. 00:18:42.480 --> 00:18:50.480 He he said previously no one would read anything I produce, so any of the tracking data that literally would just gather dust, people just didn't care. 00:18:50.559 --> 00:18:52.880 It was just whether they like the advertising. 00:18:53.039 --> 00:19:04.480 Um so so I and I think you know one of the things we're very you know focused on nationwide is you know what what you know who does this the best in the country and how how can we be better? 00:19:04.640 --> 00:19:28.480 So, you know, the marketing effectively have got a capability, you know, a metric about being the strongest and and uh team in the country, which again I think is helps with optics, because if you're going to the CFO and say we are determined to build the strongest marketing effectiveness culture in the country, that is incredibly compelling, you know, because that's something that he in this instance is a he um wants to hear. 00:19:28.640 --> 00:19:54.640 So I think I think that was sort of stage one, making it independent, bringing it in-house, and then stage two was working in a lot of detail, which took a long time, probably about six months, to basically first of all, we had to do the conjoint analysis, so we had to find out what is the role that brand plays in deciding you know where to open a bank account, a savings account, or a or a or a mortgage. 00:19:54.799 --> 00:19:59.680 And so we found that you know, in our case at the time, it was 35%. 00:20:00.400 --> 00:20:08.000 Um, but we also see that

the top performers, so Barclays, who have actually even gone up since we've done the paper, are now 86%. 00:20:08.400 --> 00:20:24.160 So 80% to 6% of people who are you know opening a Barclays current account do so because of the Barclays brand, not because you know they've got branches because they don't, because they massively struggle at branch estate, you know, not because they offer incentives because they do very rarely. 00:20:24.319 --> 00:20:32.880 So we were able to find out that that not only you know did brand play a role in the market, but there was massive headroom for us because we were underperforming. 00:20:33.039 --> 00:20:40.480 So then we said, right, what what drives brand, which is what I was um referring to with this gentleman, and we found out there were two metrics. 00:20:40.720 --> 00:20:49.279 So um mental availability, so being top of mind, so when people are thinking about current accounts, which current accounts come to mind, you need to come to mind. 00:20:49.440 --> 00:20:54.960 If you don't come to mind, everything else is relevant, and then consideration is this a brand I would consider. 00:20:55.440 --> 00:21:03.119 And we identified the exact proportion that these metrics operated, so it was 70% mental availability, 30% consideration. 00:21:03.359 --> 00:21:06.640 And the irony was we were brilliant at the least important one. 00:21:06.799 --> 00:21:10.079 So we had this phrase we used to use lovely, lovely nationwide. 00:21:10.160 --> 00:21:13.599 So everyone loves nationwide, but they just don't think of it. 00:21:13.759 --> 00:21:18.000 Um, so so we were brilliant on consideration, but very poor on top of mind. 00:21:18.319 --> 00:21:30.640 So the you know, to my point about the metrics we needed to drive a top of mind uh mental availability, and obviously continue to build consideration because it is 30%, and then together those create the brand contribution. 00:21:30.799 --> 00:21:39.359 So we we we set up all of these metrics so everyone would know exactly what the growth model is, what the metrics, and these metrics we report on every single month. 00:21:39.440 --> 00:21:53.839 So every month, you know, we say, you know, this is the PCA mental availability, this is the brand consideration, and then you know, every quarter we do the ROI and all of the um the results by channel and by campaign. 00:21:54.480 --> 00:21:58.799 I love that it's I hadn't really realized, I love that it's a mutual that has shared. 00:21:59.359 --> 00:21:59.759 Yes, yes. 00:22:00.240 --> 00:22:04.559 A model for uh our wider community that hadn't struck me before. 00:22:05.039 --> 00:22:14.640 And I'm curious to know how you would um encourage some uh an organization that was less mutually inclined, um, more secretive. 00:22:15.039 --> 00:22:17.359 What what is the upside of winning one of these awards? 00:22:17.440 --> 00:22:18.880 Because they're fucking hard work. 00:22:19.200 --> 00:22:19.680 They are. 00:22:19.920 --> 00:22:21.119 Tell me about it. 00:22:21.920 --> 00:22:31.039 Um not only are they hard work, but the way in which the awards are awarded is is very tension, very tension-inducing, um, but we're worth it because of it. 00:22:31.200 --> 00:22:36.960 Um I think it's a really difficult one, and I've been through this journey myself. 00:22:37.200 --> 00:22:46.559 Um and at Lloyd's, um, we weren't as prepared to share our metrics and our outcomes and our ROI as we have been at nationwide. 00:22:46.720 --> 00:22:53.119 And I think, you know, my argument always was I don't think what we're doing is is a complete mystery. 00:22:53.359 --> 00:22:56.480 I think what's difficult is to actually execute on it. 00:22:56.559 --> 00:23:03.200 You know, so I don't think you know we're giving the crowd, you know, so say, you know, we're saying 70% mental ability, 30% consideration. 00:23:03.359 --> 00:23:04.720 That is that our secret formula. 00:23:04.880 --> 00:23:08.640 I don't mind people knowing that because it's bloody difficult to deliver on the 70%. 00:23:09.200 --> 00:23:13.759 So so you know, I don't think these are some mysteries that we're revealing. 00:23:13.920 --> 00:23:18.000 Um I think that the skill is being able to execute against the objective. 00:23:18.160 --> 00:23:41.359 So that's always been uh my argument, and I think that you know what we've gained from it, you know, as I said right at the beginning, is the confidence in belief in terms of that what we're doing has been sort of you know independently and you know rigorously endorsed is is a great sort of shot in the arm, you know, because you know, I I sort of um slightly think, you know, case closed. 00:23:41.440 --> 00:23:44.319 You know, whatever you think of this campaign, case closed. 00:23:44.480 --> 00:23:47.680 This campaign, you know, won a gold in the IPA effectives awards. 00:23:47.920 --> 00:23:48.720 Next question. 00:23:48.880 --> 00:23:52.640 Um and I think and I think that sort of certainty is incredibly empowering. 00:23:52.880 --> 00:23:57.920 I think it makes you very attractive as an employer from a marketing point of view. 00:23:58.000 --> 00:24:08.799 I think it's very uh motivating to all the agencies, including the creative agency, you know, who who I obviously spoke about, you know, where they should focus their energies and not focus their energies. 00:24:08.960 --> 00:24:17.920 I think I think it's you know, in terms of our sort of community of agencies we work with, everyone internally, I think it's incredibly motivating, very inspiring. 00:24:18.000 --> 00:24:19.839 And we know we were like, right, now what? 00:24:19.920 --> 00:24:20.720 Let's get going. 00:24:20.799 --> 00:24:28.160 So well, on behalf of the industry, thank you very much, and thank you for adding lovely, lovely nationwide and the three Greeks in the world. 00:24:28.400 --> 00:24:29.680 Lovely lovely nationwide is in the paper. 00:24:29.839 --> 00:24:30.400 Oh, is that in the paper?

00:24:30.799 --> 00:24:31.119 A title. 00:24:31.200 --> 00:24:32.400 Uh The Three Greeks is not. 00:24:32.799 --> 00:24:33.359 Yeah, very good. 00:24:33.519 --> 00:24:34.480 Well, I'd encourage anyone. 00:24:34.799 --> 00:24:44.640 I was asking the Greeks how did they decide who was going to be because they have a leader, which is Natilla, and uh so I said, at what point in the process did you decide that she was gonna be your leader? 00:24:44.799 --> 00:24:47.119 And they said the two lads, it's two men and a woman. 00:24:47.279 --> 00:24:50.319 They said she was only ever always the leader ever since class. 00:24:50.559 --> 00:24:52.400 So uh and she's awesome, Tilla. 00:24:52.559 --> 00:25:03.519 She's so and she she couldn't come to the awards because she was so nervous, and they were they had they FaceTimed her in she was in her pajamas uh in the in the awards. 00:25:03.680 --> 00:25:05.920 It was it was very uh very touching. 00:25:06.240 --> 00:25:08.240 Very good, thank you very much, Richard. 00:25:09.839 --> 00:25:20.079 One of the things I liked about your paper is that you diagnosed a problem, which doesn't always happen these days, and you gave it quite an interesting billing. 00:25:20.240 --> 00:25:28.559 So I went through the paper remembering the term phrase you use for the problem that needed to be solved, not just we did some adverts and they worked. 00:25:28.640 --> 00:25:30.720 So can you tell me a bit about the problem definition? 00:25:30.799 --> 00:25:30.960 Yeah. 00:25:31.279 --> 00:25:32.720 The crisis of unassisted selling. 00:25:32.799 --> 00:26:07.279 So it sort of was a behaviour that we're starting to see more people going online, but then it was really exacerbated through COVID that we started really losing out to Amazon where people had been driven online, but then we were seeing that tech was the third most returned item, and that's largely down to being overspected where you'd end up assuming that if you spent more money you'd get the best product, or under spec'd where you just weren't getting the right tech for your needs, and then that was sort of compounded with vape reviews that people were not trusting the what they were reading, and there was this real need to be able to go and speak to someone face to face. 00:26:07.359 --> 00:26:27.279 But that also then trusted with a really lovely truth about curries that their colleagues get 40 hours of training, and so they are experts in their field and they're able to guide you to the right tech for your needs, not just sort of point you in the direction of what you're asking for, but really talk to you and diagnose you and give you what's right for your sort of need states. 00:26:27.599 --> 00:26:36.160 So we tested our proposition for people, and it really very clearly answered a sort of gaping problem for what people were looking for when they're shopping for tech. 00:26:36.880 --> 00:26:47.680 I mean, it sounds sort of obvious when you read a case study, but I

bet at the time it wasn't as obvious, or the the conditions needed to be perfect for the organisation to hear that. 00:26:48.160 --> 00:26:51.759 Yes, but at the time that was when they were consolidating the business. 00:26:52.000 --> 00:27:00.319 At that time, Dixon's car phone warehouse team they had, yes, they consolidated the business, and it was quite function-led for a long time and very salesman. 00:27:00.640 --> 00:27:01.279 It wasn't working. 00:27:01.440 --> 00:27:07.839 The business was sort of in decline, and they knew they knew they needed to step change the business, and then this is where we then found the truth. 00:27:07.920 --> 00:27:11.759 And so they knew they had to do something different, and they took took the risk. 00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:18.720 And then we spoke about this on stage, but that it was met with some sort of negative press of some people saying these ads are silly. 00:27:18.880 --> 00:27:21.920 Um I would fire your advertising agency if I were you. 00:27:22.079 --> 00:27:28.000 But in order to reassure them at the time when we didn't have MMM results or any sales results, because that comes, they do it yearly. 00:27:28.160 --> 00:27:34.480 We we turned to system one and we tested, and it completely smashed the benchmarks for the category that we currently sits in. 00:27:34.559 --> 00:27:38.160 And there was projectives of RI scores in it, sort of really high. 00:27:38.240 --> 00:27:42.559 And that gave them assurance to stick with it, to sort of double down. 00:27:42.720 --> 00:27:55.680 So it was the case of finding a real truth about colleagues and the brand, and then presenting it in a way with humour that created cut-through and distinctiveness against what is a both functional and try sort of category. 00:27:55.839 --> 00:28:06.400 We couldn't bore people into buying products, so we had to do something in a way that would put sort of a smile on people's faces, and we also had to talk about a lot of things, but that we did it in a fun way, so it sort of draws people in. 00:28:06.480 --> 00:28:10.880 So there was a lot of sort of companion parts quite nicely and fitting together. 00:28:11.359 --> 00:28:25.680 Ollie, tell me about the media half, which I know runs way beyond just budget levels, because people like me tend to rewrite history as being like creative invention and the power of an idea. 00:28:26.559 --> 00:28:35.920 Whereas the paper is very honest about what you did in media and also what the company had done to enable a change in media levels and intent. 00:28:36.160 --> 00:28:44.640 I think when we were writing this, what we saw was this huge gym of performance in the first year when the brand platform landed, and there is no doubt at all CREAP was a huge driver of performance. 00:28:44.799 --> 00:28:47.440 And there will be a cumulative impact on that in the following years. 00:28:47.519 --> 00:28:59.920 But the three or four years following launching, we just saw consistent growth of performance, which we do think is in some level down to the way that we optimised our media, and the way that we we changed the funding model for curry's in a way that we could absolutely drive towards a single metric. 00:29:00.000 --> 00:29:15.119 So curry's have long and friendly and very positive relationships with lots of suppliers, but as with many brands who have lots of different funding requirements and lots of different funding sources, they were digging lots of stakeholders who might have different opinions on what the primary objective should be, and that might not line up with curry's. 00:29:15.279 --> 00:29:23.519 So almost one of the most important things we did was to kind of wrangle all of that money and make sure it was pointing that one direction, which is long-term revenue for coers. 00:29:23.759 --> 00:29:25.200 And there's no panacea for that. 00:29:25.279 --> 00:29:30.880 Part of it is just going, we agree this is what we should be driving, therefore we're going to make sure it's critical in everything that we plan. 00:29:31.039 --> 00:29:36.480 It's also just having really honest conversations with the suppliers and making sure that they know that actually in the long run this is going to drive sales. 00:29:36.640 --> 00:29:39.200 You're just going to have to trust that we know what we're doing with your funding here. 00:29:39.359 --> 00:29:50.000 And what we saw is as this went in, as COEs essentially Kevin were wording, but sort of pointed funding in a closer direction, that did lead to a steady increase in performance, which benefited everyone involved. 00:29:50.160 --> 00:29:59.200 So, yeah, there was a lot of structural changes that needs to happen to make it happen, but equally, the ultimate driver's success was that single-minded focus on that one measure, which was long-term ROI. 00:29:59.359 --> 00:29:59.920 So it's great results. 00:30:00.319 --> 00:30:03.359 When you see it plotted on a chart, you're seeing this double-digit growth year on year. 00:30:04.480 --> 00:30:05.279 Two, three years. 00:30:05.599 --> 00:30:08.079 Yes, that's when they really gain the confidence in that approach. 00:30:08.400 --> 00:30:15.440 Kind of so there's two bits that firstly, I'm old enough to remember Craig Ingalls talking about John Lewis being very true to that. 00:30:15.680 --> 00:30:19.839 Lots of supplier funding not crystallizing in goodwill towards the John Lewis brand. 00:30:19.920 --> 00:30:25.039 So lots of work behind the scenes to capture that budget for the brand in turn helping the suppliers. 00:30:25.200 --> 00:30:25.440 Yes. 00:30:25.599 --> 00:30:30.480 So that playbook is familiar and probably is much harder than people like us realise. 00:30:30.720 --> 00:30:30.960 Oh, yeah. 00:30:31.039 --> 00:30:31.519 I'm upset. 00:30:31.839 --> 00:30:43.200 Second bit though, which would gladden Les's heart, is I think you've just said, and certainly the paper says optimizing for long-term revenue did not undermine

short-term returns. 00:30:43.359 --> 00:30:43.599 Yes. 00:30:43.759 --> 00:30:46.640 It goes on to say something like because they work in lockstep or whatever. 00:30:46.720 --> 00:30:47.680 So tell me about that. 00:30:48.079 --> 00:30:48.720 It's exactly that. 00:30:48.960 --> 00:30:50.880 It's his absolute dedication to a single metric. 00:30:50.960 --> 00:30:53.680 And Dan Rebells is the marketing director for Curry's. 00:30:53.839 --> 00:30:56.000 He's got ROI written behind his laptop. 00:30:56.160 --> 00:31:02.559 And it's it's honestly true, there is not a single pound we spend, but we don't know exactly what the incremental return on that will be for Curry's. 00:31:02.640 --> 00:31:07.039 And that is actually quite limiting because it's not enough just to go, oh, this is a really fascinating. 00:31:07.279 --> 00:31:09.039 We love this excavation, what a brilliant idea. 00:31:09.119 --> 00:31:10.640 We'll still we'll just put a brand study on it. 00:31:10.720 --> 00:31:12.160 And no way, I know I'll show that it's effectively. 00:31:12.319 --> 00:31:20.559 It has to be so disciplined, and there is nothing we do, but we don't have to build some very strong rationale for why this is going to have an incremental revenue benefit to curry's. 00:31:20.799 --> 00:31:27.119 And the the fact that long and short act in sort of lockstep, I think, is true, and I think that's just because that's the nature of success. 00:31:27.200 --> 00:31:34.640 If you're driving long-term revenue, you are probably going to drive short-term revenue, and bluntly it's also a factor of how econometrics works, they're going to go in the same direction. 00:31:34.799 --> 00:31:47.519 Which means that a lot of time you're saying no to a lot of things, but when you do say yes to something, everyone is so confident that this is absolutely going to work, and we know that we can sell this into the business and to every part of the business that carries because they understand the actual financial value to them as a company. 00:31:47.920 --> 00:32:04.880 It's a testament to beyond expectations as a vehicle as well, because it allows us to sort of speak to the constraints of being a supplier-funded model, but under that platform, we do talk about tech specs, we talk about offers, but we do it under such a strong sort of platform that allows us to do both in many ways. 00:32:05.200 --> 00:32:17.680 We have our strand, which is the branded strand, but Amazing Tech, which is full of lots of information, is still driving those longer-term brand scores because we have all our branded assets in there in a very clear, distinct, and consistent tone. 00:32:17.759 --> 00:32:18.880 So we're driving long-term. 00:32:18.960 --> 00:32:21.359 So that's why I was talking about some shorter-term thinking. 00:32:21.519 --> 00:32:26.559 But also, I think it sort of pops back to they were operating with very short-term thinker and it wasn't working. 00:32:26.720 --> 00:32:31.680 So I think they were in a position where they knew they had to build a stronger brand and think on long-term. 00:32:32.240 --> 00:32:34.240 You end the paper with three learnings. 00:32:34.559 --> 00:32:35.599 I'm trying to get these right. 00:32:35.759 --> 00:32:41.200 I think one is the power of fame, and one is long-term horizons, which we've talked about. 00:32:41.440 --> 00:32:44.720 The third one is the power of human, I think. 00:32:45.119 --> 00:32:45.279 Yes. 00:32:46.160 --> 00:32:47.599 Bold distinctive humour, yeah. 00:32:48.720 --> 00:32:51.200 Well, actually, human rather than just human. 00:32:52.880 --> 00:32:59.920 Because I think it is a very human answer by definition in terms of the idea, but also how it was carried through by colleagues. 00:33:00.079 --> 00:33:00.240 Yes. 00:33:00.400 --> 00:33:06.720 And I can't help feeling that maybe you've accidentally or deliberately stumbled into some new sort of secret source. 00:33:07.359 --> 00:33:20.319 The humans respond to human imperfect communication and it's very much on purpose because beyond expectations are the ways our colleagues go above and beyond for our customers and the way they show support. 00:33:20.400 --> 00:33:22.720 And then the humour comes from hyperbolising that. 00:33:22.799 --> 00:33:32.480 So with the with the humour around the human, it's always the joker's never on the customer, it's sort of it's always the colleagues in the way that they're going above and beyond. 00:33:32.559 --> 00:33:37.519 So we're never because we always run ads by the the colleagues' colleagues and get their input. 00:33:37.680 --> 00:33:42.960 So we never want to sort of be poking fun at them, but it's showing the ways that they go sort of above and beyond. 00:33:43.039 --> 00:33:49.680 And it so cleanly answers the challenge that all the insight that we had around the crisis of unassisted selling. 00:33:49.839 --> 00:33:52.799 The people want to speak to people, they want that human connection. 00:33:52.960 --> 00:33:57.839 And Curry is the unique selling point for Curry's this 40 hours of training and going above and beyond. 00:33:57.920 --> 00:34:01.200 So it was all those elements that gave us the secret sauce. 00:34:02.160 --> 00:34:04.559 For me, I think one of the things I love working on curry is. 00:34:04.720 --> 00:34:06.400 I think one of the one of the that's not what I was going to do. 00:34:06.480 --> 00:34:17.679 There's more than and I think one of the key things, and it came up on stage actually just now, is is is this a lot of the things which I've which which can be frustrating with the marketing is this focus on short term. 00:34:17.760 --> 00:34:30.159 But when I talk about short term, what I mean is platform metrics is going after all these numbers which are addictive and fun, and we we love going after them, but they're so far away from what actually matters, and that's a very frustrating thing in time, which is a game at start and eventually feels a bit useless.

00:34:30.320 --> 00:34:46.400 So being actually able to focus on something which has a real business impact is actually really, really fun and interesting, and you can fully see what that means in terms of what the the market team within Curies, how they now fit within the business, because they have this brilliant setup which is actually driving business success. 00:34:46.480 --> 00:34:49.199 And I think that's a really powerful and quite fun thing to be a part of as well. 00:34:49.599 --> 00:34:56.880 We have a very busy retail calendar beyond expectations, gives us an amazing vehicle to speak to a broad breadth of briefs. 00:34:56.960 --> 00:34:58.639 And Jez and Dave do an amazing job. 00:34:58.719 --> 00:34:59.519 They have such energy. 00:34:59.599 --> 00:35:15.199 I I say they should be the chief comedic officers at AMV because you can see their personalities within the work, like they're incredible people, and even the IPA paper, the case study film where we used AIDS to talk through it's changing our campaigns for our characters within the film. 00:35:15.280 --> 00:35:17.760 That was all them, you can see their personality coming through. 00:35:17.840 --> 00:35:19.760 And yeah, they do such a wonderful job. 00:35:19.840 --> 00:35:26.480 And even from we're about to launch Black Friday, which is the busiest time in the retail calendar, very hard-working assets. 00:35:26.639 --> 00:35:31.199 But again, they managed to smash it with a really funny campaign, which was the brief was hard. 00:35:31.280 --> 00:35:35.440 And if on a piece of paper, we have uh Black Friday toolkit, which is all sort of neons. 00:35:35.599 --> 00:35:40.960 Last year we had a choir, which is about low prices of research, we're talking about the sort of biggest ever event. 00:35:41.119 --> 00:35:45.199 We had so many sort of restrictions, but still the adders are incredibly funny. 00:35:45.440 --> 00:35:47.280 There's bodybuilders, I'll put it there. 00:35:48.320 --> 00:35:57.519 Yeah, so they every time you think that you they sometimes when you give bridge creativity, oh sorry, but they every time they had the same energy and they managed to smash it. 00:35:57.599 --> 00:36:02.239 And when we showed the IRL to the room, everyone was laughing, and that's a testament to doesn't think. 00:36:03.119 --> 00:36:08.000 Tell me what it felt like to win an IPA effectiveness award or what it feels like. 00:36:08.159 --> 00:36:09.280 It's quite recent. 00:36:09.840 --> 00:36:10.719 It's pretty good, isn't it? 00:36:10.880 --> 00:36:11.599 Yeah, pretty good. 00:36:11.840 --> 00:36:13.679 So I'm tragic because I couldn't make night. 00:36:14.559 --> 00:36:19.599 I was abroad and I genuinely looked at every single possible flight I could do to try and make sure I could arrive there. 00:36:19.679 --> 00:36:23.360 And it would have involved me staying overnight in an airport, I think somehow over two nights. 00:36:23.440 --> 00:36:25.840 It just none of it had adult, essentially,

which is a real shame. 00:36:26.000 --> 00:36:27.599 I was getting live texts, obviously. 00:36:27.760 --> 00:36:28.480 I know it's brilliant. 00:36:28.559 --> 00:36:35.119 We so we have uh every week we have a big meeting which is XAMV and it's Spark and it's um coasm sitting room and go through all the campaigns. 00:36:35.199 --> 00:36:38.639 And we just sat down and go, Yeah, maybe we're the best, maybe we're the best at this. 00:36:39.840 --> 00:36:40.719 That's quite nice, isn't it? 00:36:40.800 --> 00:36:42.239 Yeah, um it feels pretty. 00:36:42.480 --> 00:36:44.079 I see I still look quite sunk in. 00:36:44.159 --> 00:36:45.519 I just feel immensely proud of Sam. 00:36:45.840 --> 00:36:52.400 It's really a shame that he can't be here today because he he didn't really spearhead this whole thing and he's been on since the very, very beginning. 00:36:52.559 --> 00:36:54.719 So yeah, I was very proud of all of us. 00:36:54.880 --> 00:36:57.280 Curry's, as you can tell, how we gushed about Curry's. 00:36:57.360 --> 00:37:00.480 It's it's not only is the work great, but it's also just a genuinely lovely team. 00:37:00.559 --> 00:37:04.559 Our clients are great, they're great partners, and they allow us to push the creativity. 00:37:04.639 --> 00:37:10.000 They always push us to be more unexpected, and it's a perfect partner for create great great work. 00:37:10.079 --> 00:37:16.000 So it's yeah, it's a real swelling of pride, I think, and proud of all of us, and also a testament to Sam. 00:37:16.159 --> 00:37:25.840 He he he attributes it the win to sort of everyone who's touched the campaign from the from the moment that it launched, and not only the people still working at AMP at Spark, but everyone who's touched it. 00:37:25.920 --> 00:37:27.039 So that's what's really lovely. 00:37:27.119 --> 00:37:29.360 It's a testament to the whole team. 00:37:29.679 --> 00:37:31.920 I think I actually read is your client called Dan? 00:37:32.079 --> 00:37:32.880 Yes, Dan Rebel. 00:37:33.119 --> 00:37:40.400 I think I read a LinkedIn post where he was at pains to talk about you and I'm sure Sam, who I haven't met, and others as co-conspirators. 00:37:40.639 --> 00:37:44.159 I think it's an amazing thing for clients about their agency team. 00:37:44.480 --> 00:37:44.800 Yeah. 00:37:45.039 --> 00:37:58.880 I said it on stage though, even when we sort of pitched for the Channel 4 work, the diversity award, it feels like you're showing up as Curry's team, not current client and agency, which is again, I think you can see it in the work that it's a real partnership. 00:37:59.280 --> 00:37:59.519 100%. 00:37:59.920 --> 00:38:06.480 I think from uh the accounts I've worked on, I've never worked on one which isn't this is by far in the way the most integrated in the way that we all work together. 00:38:06.639 --> 00:38:11.760 Um but for Spark, we've been Curry's agency for I think 30 years ago, some silly amount of time. 00:38:11.920 --> 00:38:13.280 And that is

seen. 00:38:13.519 --> 00:38:23.679 I think we we understand the business so well, and as do A and V, absolutely, and I think you can see exactly how that comes out in terms of the conversations that we have with them, and now hopefully in terms of the the the business success as well, which has come back. 00:38:24.400 --> 00:38:25.039 Thank you very much. 00:38:28.639 --> 00:38:39.760 You very kindly agreed to read our gold and Grand Prix winning papers after the event, so you didn't receive them in advance of Thursday night, and it's only Wednesday afternoon. 00:38:40.159 --> 00:38:51.199 It is actually but you've rather assiduously gone through each of them, and I I'd be fascinated to hear what themes you saw across them, rather than talking to you in in depth about each one. 00:38:51.760 --> 00:38:56.800 What did you see as someone who's written and won your fair share of PFA results? 00:38:57.199 --> 00:38:59.920 So I read five and I did feel there were some common themes. 00:39:00.320 --> 00:39:11.679 In general, actually, I I felt that that there was quite a lot of stuff which was broadly in the area of budgets and media and all that stuff about investing for growth. 00:39:12.480 --> 00:39:24.400 So I think it's true that maybe all but one of the five papers I read they had a secured extra budget in order to sort of turn things around. 00:39:24.960 --> 00:39:30.159 And that actually spending more was a big part of the success story. 00:39:30.400 --> 00:39:40.239 Now that's all not always been the case with IPA papers, because we've we've often had papers in the past which were actually more about spending less and doing things more efficiently. 00:39:40.480 --> 00:39:52.639 Obviously, given the things that I've wanged on about over the last year about go big or go home, and we need bigger budgets and bigger media plans, that fits with my own personal evil plans. 00:39:53.360 --> 00:39:55.679 Um so I thought that was quite heartening. 00:39:55.920 --> 00:40:04.960 Um and and within that, also it's almost as if they'd read some books by people like Benfield. 00:40:05.599 --> 00:40:09.760 There was some stuff about uh balancing short-term and long-term. 00:40:10.880 --> 00:40:19.679 So in particular, Andrex went from 50-50 to long-term and short term, and a low budget. 00:40:20.480 --> 00:40:23.519 And they dialed up the brand budget. 00:40:23.840 --> 00:40:28.960 So that the total budget got bigger, and they went from that 50-50 to 75-25. 00:40:29.440 --> 00:40:38.960 And 75-25 is exactly the ratio that we recommended in our book from 2018 for brand leaders like Android. 00:40:39.519 --> 00:40:44.320 So it was for us, you know, for Peter and I, we we would say I'm speaking on it. 00:40:45.280 --> 00:40:48.639 It's it's a textbook example of the kind of thing we recommend. 00:40:58.880 --> 00:41:03.360 So I have to ask maybe more generally about the long and the shortness of it. 00:41:03.679 --> 00:41:09.039 In respect of the fact that some of those winners were very long effects. 00:41:13.039 --> 00:41:21.599 But I I was particularly pleased to see that actually some of the big winners were reporting a fairly short, fairly quick turnaround. 00:41:22.239 --> 00:41:36.559 So I have to keep the paper straight in my head, but I think that the Andrex one, you could see I I was a little bit skeptical until I got towards the end of the paper, and there's a whole bunch of grumps where it just they just turnaround straight away. 00:41:36.960 --> 00:41:42.559 Yeah, I think there is this misunderstanding sometimes about what we mean by long term. 00:41:42.880 --> 00:41:57.360 I've seen a somebody posted on LinkedIn only last week about, you know, oh you can't in when times are tough, you can't be bothering about the long term and waiting for the profits to come like a check in the post in three years' time. 00:41:57.920 --> 00:42:01.119 It's not that long-term effects are delayed effects. 00:42:01.360 --> 00:42:03.760 What they are is lasting effects. 00:42:04.079 --> 00:42:09.440 So the Andres one showed, you know, that you can immediately get a turnaround. 00:42:09.679 --> 00:42:19.280 But one of the papers now I do get these confused, but one of them talked about uh oh, I think it was the Alzheimer's one, that's right. 00:42:19.519 --> 00:42:26.559 That they saw an immediate effect, but that it would last in terms of how much money the flow of money for decades. 00:42:27.119 --> 00:42:30.559 Because they were getting people to make legacies. 00:42:31.039 --> 00:42:37.599 So you know they got an immediate effect of people pledging to remember Alzheimer's and they will. 00:42:38.639 --> 00:42:39.760 A lasting effect. 00:42:44.960 --> 00:42:46.639 Giving money for for decades. 00:42:47.199 --> 00:42:55.119 So I d I d I think I don't want to change the terminology, but the point is long term does not mean delay. 00:43:07.280 --> 00:43:07.679 Yeah, yeah, yeah. 00:43:10.159 --> 00:43:11.519 I don't know your point of view. 00:43:16.559 --> 00:43:20.000 Which is the paper that included a brand valuation. 00:43:20.559 --> 00:43:24.400 The paper, the gold-winning paper that includes a brand valuation is for Spect Savers. 00:43:24.880 --> 00:43:29.599 Which essentially is putting you know present value? 00:43:29.840 --> 00:43:30.639 Yeah, yeah. 00:43:31.039 --> 00:43:36.800 Yeah, so Spect Savers did not rely on that brand value calculation. 00:43:37.039 --> 00:43:46.800 They did the kind of more conventional the profit ROI first, and then they looked at it another way by saying, okay, what's the value of the brand? 00:43:47.360 --> 00:43:59.760 I I can't actually remember whether they really show the contribution of advertising to the value of the brand, which is a little if they didn't do that, that kind of that's an extra set that one would. 00:44:00.159 --> 00:44:00.800 Need to do. 00:44:00.960 --> 00:44:05.519 That's a useful alternative way of looking at things because I've used it myself.

00:44:05.760 --> 00:44:15.440 Years ago, when we did one of the papers on Felix Cat food, what we did was we had a long-term paper where the brand had actually changed hands. 00:44:15.599 --> 00:44:26.400 It was sold, I can't remember, it was once upon a time it was Quaker, and then it was sold to someone else, and then it was sold by them to Nestle, I think. 00:44:26.480 --> 00:44:27.519 But Nestle Karina. 00:44:28.000 --> 00:44:28.400 Yeah. 00:44:28.719 --> 00:44:34.800 So we had two points where we didn't have to have a valuation of the brand, we had a market price for the brand. 00:44:34.880 --> 00:44:41.199 And we could look at the how much it had gone up during the period in question. 00:44:41.360 --> 00:44:46.800 And we sort of made the argument that advertising was the main driver of their growth during that period. 00:44:46.960 --> 00:45:02.239 In fact, actually, now I come to think of it, we did that again with another one years ago that no one will remember called Frazel Insurance, which won a bronze in 1996, I think it was, and is entirely the origin of the long and the short of it. 00:45:02.880 --> 00:45:07.920 All the analysis that behind the long and the short of it came from that IPA paper, really. 00:45:08.079 --> 00:45:12.960 Anyway, but but again, we had a point where the brand had been bought and sold twice. 00:45:13.119 --> 00:45:19.760 So you some can sometimes have a market price for a brand, as opposed to a kind of like finger-in-the-air estimate. 00:45:32.159 --> 00:45:36.960 So it's it's a useful thing, but you know, cross-bracing. 00:45:37.119 --> 00:45:41.440 Look at the the the answer from a number of different perspectives, I'd say. 00:45:41.760 --> 00:45:44.480 So talking of cross-bracing, I've never heard that before. 00:45:44.719 --> 00:45:45.840 I may just made it up. 00:45:46.239 --> 00:45:47.440 Well, we'll go with it. 00:45:47.679 --> 00:45:49.920 How are you feeling about ROI these days? 00:45:50.159 --> 00:45:50.800 Well, okay. 00:45:51.360 --> 00:46:01.760 It's funny, I was on a stage with Andrew Tyndall last week, I think it was, and we were asked this question which metric would you put in room 101 or whatever it was? 00:46:01.840 --> 00:46:04.880 And he said, about an O Your one, it'll be it would be ROI. 00:46:05.679 --> 00:46:06.559 And I said, no. 00:46:08.079 --> 00:46:10.639 Because ROI does have a role to play. 00:46:10.719 --> 00:46:22.400 It's one that, you know, what what what I get pissed off about is people making it like the one metric or the primary metric. 00:46:22.639 --> 00:46:40.639 It's a bit like, you know, on the dashboard of a car, you know, maybe the revs is, you know, you wouldn't necessarily want to get rid of the rev counter, but you wouldn't want to make it the thing that, you know, you drive by, you know, going, okay, I don't pay attention to speed or direction or anything else. 00:46:40.719 --> 00:46:46.000 I just want to keep my revs steadily on that number, you know, or maximize or minimise or whatever. 00:46:46.239 --> 00:47:03.920 So ROI has a role to play, particularly if you've got a bunch of money and you've got two channels and you're deciding where the next pound goes, then you go, okay, right, well, this one has a high marginal ROI, so we'll dial that one up a bit. 00:47:04.079 --> 00:47:10.320 And then the other thing, of course, is are you measuring ROI short term or or or long term? 00:47:10.960 --> 00:47:19.280 So there's no one perfect metric, it's but that one can be dangerous if you make it your North Star. 00:47:20.000 --> 00:47:22.320 So what did you put in room 101 as a metric? 00:47:22.559 --> 00:47:23.199 Oh, I don't know. 00:47:23.280 --> 00:47:26.000 I don't think I actually came up with a decent answer, to be honest. 00:47:26.320 --> 00:47:27.440 Likes or impressions? 00:47:27.760 --> 00:47:30.159 I think I might have said something along those lines, actually. 00:47:30.320 --> 00:47:33.519 The fluffy stuff, brand up or something like that, you know. 00:47:33.920 --> 00:47:46.480 You so we're we're chatting at Stroke After the effectiveness conference, where you've just landed your latest little effectiveness bomb around the astonishing dependency on promotions. 00:47:46.559 --> 00:47:53.519 I'm using that advisory because I had no idea quite how big promotions had become to dwarf paid-for media. 00:47:53.679 --> 00:48:06.559 And it struck me that at least a couple of the papers you read talked about that as well, and that win the same win you talked about on stage earlier, which is for no pounds there's profit upside. 00:48:06.880 --> 00:48:07.679 Yeah, exactly. 00:48:07.760 --> 00:48:25.440 So price promotions are huge, and one of the reasons that m most people in our world don't know this, and I think possibly even some clients might, some marketers might not have the complete picture, is the big cost of the price promotion is the cost of the discount. 00:48:25.760 --> 00:48:34.320 It's not a media cost, but you know, the fulfillment cost of you know giving away X percent for free, effectively. 00:48:34.559 --> 00:48:42.719 And that's I think it's often not listed in anywhere in the accounts as an as a line item. 00:48:42.880 --> 00:48:48.239 And if it is, it's in the trade budget, you know, it's not in what's called the marketing budget. 00:48:48.320 --> 00:48:50.800 I mean it's marketing in the wider sense of marketing. 00:48:50.880 --> 00:49:12.159 But again, I first saw this working on pet food years and years ago, where I actually that you know the client I was working on, probably guess who it is, they showed me the figures where it was the whole of their uh what they call PFME spend, you know, and it's got you know all the trade spend and the marketing communications and things. 00:49:12.320 --> 00:49:21.039 And I just went, oh my god, I mean in that case, I mean their their trade spend was like ten times the marketing spend. 00:49:21.199 --> 00:49:23.280 And most of that was

price promotions. 00:49:23.440 --> 00:49:33.039 And also I had it tracked over time, and it was just like like that, you know, and I just I had I think I showed this at an IPA meeting 20 years ago. 00:49:33.920 --> 00:49:41.280 This is what's destroying our industry, but you know, it's not listed in the things that we normally see. 00:49:41.519 --> 00:49:44.000 I think it's probably bigger than Google, you know. 00:49:44.400 --> 00:49:46.719 It's a sort of silent killer, you know. 00:49:46.960 --> 00:49:53.119 And pet food's actually a very good example because as a dog owner, my dog's not gonna eat any more. 00:49:53.360 --> 00:49:54.079 I might buy more. 00:49:54.159 --> 00:49:57.840 In fact, I do buy more when it's on promotion, but I can't get the dog to eat more. 00:49:58.320 --> 00:50:12.480 So it's exactly you know, it's just and well, of course, Andrex, you know, for all their attempts to, you know, do adverts about pooing, they're not gonna get people to ship more, are they? 00:50:12.639 --> 00:50:13.199 You know? 00:50:14.079 --> 00:50:16.000 So that's pretty much fixed. 00:50:16.400 --> 00:50:19.199 But they did talk about promotional dependency. 00:50:19.519 --> 00:50:20.400 Yes, they did, exactly. 00:50:20.480 --> 00:50:21.039 That was the point. 00:50:23.280 --> 00:50:31.119 Their brand was weak, they were dependent on promotions, they were finding it harder and harder to justify a price premium. 00:50:31.280 --> 00:50:37.519 And so they were losing market share to all these kind of knockoff brands and own label and stuff like that. 00:50:37.760 --> 00:50:46.480 So and you know, they they turned things around by putting money back into brand investment again and becoming less dependent on price promotions. 00:50:46.639 --> 00:50:49.440 So that's a classic example of the kind of thing we talk about. 00:50:49.599 --> 00:50:55.280 Um, two years ago I was part of the team that wrote the McCain paper, um, and that was a very similar thing. 00:50:55.440 --> 00:50:59.039 We were, you know, at the end of the day, you're just selling potato. 00:50:59.920 --> 00:51:02.079 There's no real difference between the products. 00:51:02.239 --> 00:51:08.800 Sorry, McCain, but you know, but you you know, your aim is basically to get people to pay more for the same thing. 00:51:08.880 --> 00:51:11.679 And that's one superpower's brands, really. 00:51:12.239 --> 00:51:15.440 You also used uh today you used an automotive example. 00:51:15.599 --> 00:51:15.840 Yes. 00:51:16.079 --> 00:51:28.000 And I think I'm pretty sure the nationwide paper includes other financial services brands' dependency on incentives or interest rates or yeah, cost. 00:51:29.119 --> 00:51:39.440 I I don't remember that bit, but what I do remember from the nationwide paper was that they had reduced their own dependency on financial incentives. 00:51:39.519 --> 00:51:43.760 So presumably they were doing some kind of giveaways to people who open an account. 00:51:44.079 --> 00:51:51.840 I suppose my point is that it's not just an FMCG cowering in the face of, you know, no retailer power. 00:51:52.400 --> 00:52:08.320 Yeah, I mean we the the thing that I talked about today, the research I talked about today is quite dependent on the research is quite focused on consumer goods, because that's where there's a lot more data in research. 00:52:08.480 --> 00:52:14.239 But I think a lot of the same issues will apply to some service brands. 00:52:14.559 --> 00:52:19.440 I have to be slightly careful there, because subscription services may differ in some ways. 00:52:19.599 --> 00:52:36.639 For example, it may, you know, if you're a if you're a bank, it may actually be worth your while to bribe someone with some sort of a you know£100, you know, joining fee or something, if you think they're gonna be with you for 40 years or something like that. 00:52:36.800 --> 00:52:45.360 But yeah, I mean the whole thing of sort of buying customers, if you like, is is quite prevalent in services. 00:52:45.679 --> 00:52:55.679 But buying customers, I mean, at risk of quoting Drucker, and I think this is what you were suggesting earlier, buying customers, buying new customers, actually fine to a point. 00:52:56.000 --> 00:52:56.480 Could be, yeah. 00:52:56.960 --> 00:53:01.199 Just buying custom or bringing forward customer is the expensive bit. 00:53:01.519 --> 00:53:06.639 So it it depends a lot on what kind of service it is and what's the sort of mechanism. 00:53:06.719 --> 00:53:29.039 So subscription services will be different from what you might call perishable services, like say a haircut or something like that, you know, where where it's you know, it's hair haircuts are much more like buying toilet roll, you know, you have to buy a certain number on a regular basis, you you uh and and it's not a subscription thing. 00:53:29.280 --> 00:53:32.400 So you you are quite free. 00:53:32.559 --> 00:53:38.159 I'm really boxing myself him by talking about haircuts, given how loyal I am to my hairdresser. 00:53:38.480 --> 00:53:54.639 But yeah, so uh you have to look at the dynamics of precise dynamics of how people choose the product or service, also the costs involved, and then the retention-repeat mechanism, which can be different with services. 00:53:54.800 --> 00:54:11.199 So, for example, when I talk about the costs involved, one area where discounting often is really a good idea is I think Dom used the term clearance, you know, where you know this sandwich is gonna be thrown away if it's not sold today. 00:54:11.360 --> 00:54:17.920 Or, and in the case of services, this airline seat will be empty unless we fill it by 5 pm. 00:54:18.320 --> 00:54:29.760 Um, and in that case, it may be that you know slashing the price to to sell uh something rather than nothing is uh it makes good sense. 00:54:30.159 --> 00:54:39.199 Yeah, they're great examples, they remind me that you've always, I think, encouraged people to be very precise about their

situation, their categories, their marketing. 00:54:39.920 --> 00:54:47.119 You are known as uh as an expert in measurement, but I I also think you have had a ringside seat on great making. 00:54:47.199 --> 00:54:49.840 And I know that one of the things you spotted across these papers. 00:54:50.239 --> 00:54:50.960 Humour. 00:54:51.199 --> 00:54:52.400 Absolutely, yeah. 00:54:52.639 --> 00:54:58.960 So um we had Curries, Nationwide, and Spect Savers all used humour, didn't they? 00:54:59.119 --> 00:55:00.480 I think those were the three. 00:55:00.800 --> 00:55:01.840 Were there any others? 00:55:02.159 --> 00:55:04.400 Those are the ones that s struck me. 00:55:04.719 --> 00:55:06.400 I think Andrex does in its slightly wonderful. 00:55:06.719 --> 00:55:07.119 Yeah, okay. 00:55:07.199 --> 00:55:10.400 Well, I have to say I've not seen the Andrex ads. 00:55:10.480 --> 00:55:11.840 I've just seen them in the paper. 00:55:12.000 --> 00:55:14.800 So I yeah, yes, there was a sort of wonky humour to that. 00:55:15.280 --> 00:55:21.360 And I find incredible that we have to sort of justify humour. 00:55:21.519 --> 00:55:45.599 It's like, you know, the way you could see in the way in these papers, it was like, you know, well, you know, you might think, for example, yes, it was in the spectators one, because of course they moved into hearing, and they're sort of going, well, of course, this is much more serious business, you know, because you know, it's very it's a just terrible disability, and you know, it's not really appropriate to be, you know, to make jokes about you know hearing loss, you know. 00:55:45.679 --> 00:55:48.880 And I mean, I was just thinking, nonsense. 00:55:48.960 --> 00:56:03.679 I mean, this it's a rich vein of humour, but they they really had to sort of justify using humour, even though they had decades of experience a bit working at Spec Savers. 00:56:04.000 --> 00:56:09.039 Curry's got quite a lot of pushback about whether about humour and you know whether it was appropriate. 00:56:09.199 --> 00:56:11.360 I think there was that in nationwide as well. 00:56:11.599 --> 00:56:24.639 But humour, I mean, maybe because I grew up in BNP, you know, in in the 80s and with all that heritage going back into the 70s. 00:56:25.119 --> 00:56:31.920 Great humorous advertising, you know, we know that humour works better than almost anything else. 00:56:32.159 --> 00:56:35.360 So, I mean, that was great to see it coming back. 00:56:35.440 --> 00:56:36.639 I'd like to see more of that. 00:56:37.199 --> 00:56:48.800 It's also the antidote to the dreadful phase of you know purpose advertising, which was such a dead end and such a waste of money. 00:56:49.039 --> 00:56:51.679 And these two things seem to not be able to coexist. 00:56:51.920 --> 00:56:59.599 In fact, anyone who's sort of got a sense of social purpose these days, human seems terribly suspect. 00:56:59.679 --> 00:57:03.679 You know, it's kind of like you know, saving the planet is a serious business. 00:57:03.840 --> 00:57:11.519 We're not saving the planet, we're selling Lou Roll and you know fridges at currics and stuff like that, you know. 00:57:13.039 --> 00:57:18.320 Even if you are saving the planet, your old agency has Columbia, I think, as outdoor brands. 00:57:18.480 --> 00:57:18.719 That's right. 00:57:18.960 --> 00:57:21.760 And that is a much more interesting story for being told humorously. 00:57:22.000 --> 00:57:35.679 I mean, humour's not the only way you can get people interest, but but you know, we know that advertising, brand advertising tends to brand advertising has to talk to people when they're not interested in what you have to say. 00:57:35.920 --> 00:57:41.199 So you have to do things that are inherently interesting and inherently enjoyable that keep them watching. 00:57:41.440 --> 00:57:48.880 And you need to have some sort of emotional impact so that they get engaged and they remember what you who you are and all that sort of thing. 00:57:49.119 --> 00:57:51.519 And humour's one way to do that. 00:57:51.760 --> 00:58:03.760 And the other thing is I think it's really important, almost like politically, environmentally, that we make ads that people enjoy because otherwise we're just polluting people's lives. 00:58:04.000 --> 00:58:12.320 So when you make ads that are funny, enjoyable, entertaining, and all that sort of thing, the advertiser wins and the audience wins. 00:58:12.559 --> 00:58:21.840 The other thing is that humour is one of the only ways of getting that kind of an emotional response in a brief time frame. 00:58:22.320 --> 00:58:24.719 Because you can do a really quick joke. 00:58:24.960 --> 00:58:29.280 It's really hard to make someone cry in, you know, five seconds. 00:58:29.360 --> 00:58:32.960 You know, you can you that requires more emotional storytelling. 00:58:33.119 --> 00:58:39.519 But you know, in a world where we often have to do a lot of things that are in a very short compass, humour can be a great way to do it. 00:58:39.679 --> 00:58:41.440 Spectres do that so well, don't they? 00:58:41.840 --> 00:58:44.480 Did it two weeks ago with a buyer tapestry tactical? 00:58:44.880 --> 00:58:45.280 Yes. 00:58:46.320 --> 00:58:56.880 The one I loved was the year years and years ago where someone drove over a roundabout and on the crash site, they put up a poster saying should have gone to spectators, you know. 00:58:57.039 --> 00:58:58.639 And it's a quick fire gag. 00:58:58.719 --> 00:59:00.719 Yeah, so I mean, I love humour. 00:59:00.880 --> 00:59:02.960 I I take humour very seriously. 00:59:03.199 --> 00:59:06.320 So it's really nice to see that that coming back. 00:59:06.480 --> 00:59:13.119 I mean, maybe the other thing is people, yeah, I you know, I say things and people hear something else. 00:59:13.519 --> 00:59:33.039 Talking about emotional advertising, and possibly Adam and Eve with John Lewis, you know, back in the days when the John Lewis ads were good, we created a style

of emotional advertising but which is much more tear-jerking, and people have begun to think that's what I mean by emotional advertising. 00:59:33.199 --> 00:59:35.599 But a good joke is an emotional response. 00:59:35.920 --> 00:59:38.159 I think you always meant response. 00:59:38.480 --> 00:59:39.599 Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. 00:59:40.159 --> 00:59:40.639 The stimulus. 00:59:41.039 --> 00:59:49.280 Yes, and it doesn't have to be a tear-jerking response, it can be, you know, you know, a laugh or even just a sort of like, hmm, you know. 00:59:49.599 --> 00:59:55.599 When you see a beautifully designed poster, for example, that's an emotional response as well. 00:59:56.000 --> 01:00:00.079 I've got one last question for you, which you don't have to answer if you if nothing comes to mind readily. 01:00:00.320 --> 01:00:13.599 I kind of sit in the audience at these things thinking that a lot of the problems in our industry are things we've invited into our midst and that we're responsible for our predicament. 01:00:13.760 --> 01:00:24.639 I'm thinking today about things like direct mail and retail media where we seem to decide that they were the shitty end of what we did, and so they've come out shitty. 01:00:24.800 --> 01:00:25.119 Yeah. 01:00:25.519 --> 01:00:32.639 And I'm pretty sure I've heard you speak previously about an industry being so busy sort of fighting each other for share of the cake. 01:00:32.880 --> 01:00:33.039 Yeah. 01:00:33.840 --> 01:00:36.159 Not making the cake bigger, yeah, absolutely. 01:00:36.400 --> 01:00:37.920 Yeah, there's a couple of things in there. 01:00:38.079 --> 01:00:45.679 One, I mean, that's the thing I've been banging on about over the last year, is about making the cake bigger, go big or go home. 01:00:46.000 --> 01:00:52.800 Just I think we've not fully remembered how important scale is to everything we do. 01:00:52.880 --> 01:01:02.800 So we've sort of constantly fine-tuning things, and it's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, you know, for individual brands and for the industry as a whole. 01:01:03.039 --> 01:01:05.519 So that that's part of the problem. 01:01:05.760 --> 01:01:12.159 There is also snobbery, isn't there, in our business, you know, that we regard certain activities as grubby. 01:01:12.480 --> 01:01:24.719 Um, so I think I think I once actually said in somebody's hearing about the you know grubby business of direct mail, and yes, she's she was a direct mail expert. 01:01:24.960 --> 01:01:29.920 She kept saying over the years, kept saying, you know, yeah, I work at the grubby end of things. 01:01:30.079 --> 01:01:37.440 But yeah, I mean, there's we would all like to be working on really, you know, gorgeous films. 01:01:37.679 --> 01:01:49.599 I mean, it is kind of ironic that as I say, I felt with these five papers I read, that there was quite a lot of media in there, in the broadest sense, including budget. 01:01:49.840 --> 01:02:01.199 And yeah, we do have to remember, I mean, I I have this chart that I sometimes put up about, you know, it's about 50% when you're thinking about ROI, it's about 50-50 media and creative. 01:02:01.360 --> 01:02:08.719 And we do have to remember that the creative bit, the creative content, is really, really important. 01:02:09.119 --> 01:02:14.159 I mean, it won't work without all the budget and the media, but it's really it's that is the magic. 01:02:14.559 --> 01:02:15.519 Great place to end. 01:02:15.599 --> 01:02:16.239 Thank you, Les. 01:02:16.639 --> 01:02:22.480 Thank you for listening to the effectiveness files brought to you in partnership with our friends at TrackSuit. 01:02:22.639 --> 01:02:28.400 You can download any of this year's IPA award-winning papers from the IPA or from WARK. 01:02:28.719 --> 01:02:29.920 Till next time.