TELLING TALES: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC ACCOUNT OF

CREATIVITY IN AGENCY-CLIENT RELATIONS

Margaret K. Hogg Senior Lecturer in Consumer Behaviour

Manchester School of Management

UMIST PO Box 88

Manchester M60 1QD

Tel 44 161 200 3519 Fax 44 161 200 3505

Email: m.hogg@umist.ac.uk

Ben Scoggins*

Manchester School of Management UMIST

PO Box 88 Manchester M60 1QD

[Young and Rubicam Ltd Greater London House

Hampstead Road London NW1 7QP

Tel 44 71 387 9366 Fax 44 71 611 6638]

Email: benscoggins@hotmail.com

Critical Management Studies Conference

Manchester July 2001

Acknowledgements: the authors would like to acknowledge the bursary from the Peter Roberts Scholarship from the Jean Rich Foundation which funded the second author’s studies at Manchester School of Management, UMIST, on which this research was based.

2

TELLING TALES: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC ACCOUNT OF

CREATIVITY IN AGENCY-CLIENT RELATIONS

ABSTRACT

Creativity is at the heart of agency-client relationships in advertising. However creativity remains an elusive concept, difficult to identify and evaluate. An ethnographic approach is used to explore how creativity is represented, understood and constituted in agency-client relations in the U.K. advertising industry. The themes of creative styles and levels; the creative process and product; and the creative ethos and environment are used as ‘sensitizing concepts’ from earlier research. A conceptual framework of the inter-relationship between the creative process and creative product is proposed. The empirical material is reported via a combination of traditional/realist and impressionistic tales. The applicability of such metaphors as ‘theatre’ and ‘war’ to understanding creativity within the context of agency-client relations are reviewed within the analysis. A discussion of creativity as both product and service highlights the interplay and juxtaposition of meanings around the concept of creativity within the context of the advertising industry.

3

“The advertising industry is characterized by work that is hard to specify and

a product that is difficult to evaluate” (Alvesson 1994:542)

INTRODUCTION Creativity is central to agency-client relations in advertising (Mondroksi, Reid and Russell 1983; Michell 1984; Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987; Tinkham, Lane and Leung 1987; Verbeke 1988:26; Klebba and Tierney 1995; Alvesson 1994; Halinen 1997):

“Creativity is the heart and soul of advertising services and consequently a critical resource in every business relationship” (Halinen 1997:28).

Creativity represents an important criteria in selecting advertising agencies (Halinen 1997:28) and in evaluating them: “creative skill is by far the most important criterion used [by a client] in evaluating an agency” (Henke 1995:26). Creativity is an important predictor of overall satisfaction with an agency (Halinen 1997:28). The standard of creative work is a common reason for agency switches (Doyle et al 1980:19; Michell 1987:30-31, cited in Halinen 1997:66) and “different concepts of creativity quickly lead to disagreement (Michell 1984)” (Halinen 1997:66). However, perceptions of creativity have altered significantly since the seminal study of agency-client perceptions of creativity (Michell 1984) because of major changes in the advertising industry (e.g. the development of integrated marketing communications and the emergence of account and media planning (Cook 1996:7; Michell 1998)). There has been increasing recognition of the importance of the distinction between the creative process and creative product (Louis-Dreyfus 1990, cited in Fendley 1996:79; Talbot 1997). And views of creativity have evolved (Isaksen and Dorval 1993; Talbot 1997; Rickards 1998) so that:

“The areas in which agencies are being asked to provide creative contributions have long been extended beyond creating great ads into the integration of a variety of marketing communications” (Cook 1996:7).

Against the background of these changes, we investigated how creativity in agency-client relations is currently represented, understood and constituted (Alvesson 1994:560) in the U.K. advertising industry. Two metaphorical devices dominate our tales from the field: the theatre and war. These tales can be taken as despatches from the front and are used to denote the role of both theatrical (Goffman; see also Alvesson 1994:558) and battle imagery in sense-making about creativity in agency-client relations. In this way we seek to explore the ‘webs of significance’ that have been spun around (Geertz 1973: 5-6 cited in Bantz 1983:59; also Sanday 1979:533) and enmesh creativity in agency-client relations. This study belongs to the category of “ethnographies of marketing” in its examination of “people in organizations carrying out the activities of marketing management” (Arnould and Wallendorf 1994:484); and to the micro-substantive group of ethnographic studies for theory-building (Hammersley and Atkinson 1995: 237-238) because of its concern with “more local forms of social organization” (Hammersley and Atkinson 1995:237) i.e. face-to-face encounters across a series of interactions (involving both ‘backstage’ encounters amongst agency personnel and also ‘frontstage encounters’ between agency-client personnel)

4

(Alvesson 1994:558) in an advertising agency, presented from the perspective of members of an advertising agency in the U.K. industry. We begin with a literature review of creativity and agency-client relations from which two models – and a series of sensitising concepts - are identified (Isaksen and Norval 1993; Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987:24). A conceptual framework is proposed of the inter-relationship between the creative product and the creative process within agency-client interactions. Following Alvesson (1994) we use a conceptual framework ‘to interpret – more than strictly guide or structure’ (Alvesson 1994:536) the study. After a brief description of our ethnographic stance (Van Maanen 1978:537), we use a combination of traditional/realist and impressionistic tales to describe, analyze and interpret (Holloway 1997) different aspects of the ‘webs of significance’ which surround and support creativity in agency-client relations. The applicability of such metaphors as ‘theatre’ and ‘war’ to understanding the management of creativity within the context of agency-client relations are reviewed. Finally, we discuss the interplay, juxtaposition and disjunctures (Arnould and Wallendorf 1994:) of meanings within the webs of significance which enmesh creativity and which revolve around creativity as both ‘product’ and ‘service’ within the advertising industry.

CREATIVITY: PERSON, PROCESS, PLACE AND PRODUCT

‘Creativity is about the quality of originality that leads to new ways of seeing and novel ideas. It is a thinking process associated with imagination, insight, invention, innovation, ingenuity, intuition, inspiration and illumination.’ Henry (1991, p3)

The concept of creativity is central to this study, and yet ‘there is no universally accepted meaning of creativity’ (Ackoff and Vergara 1981), although a number of synonyms have been identified including: productive thinking; divergent thinking; originality; imagination; and lateral thinking (Ackoff and Vergara 1981). However, creativity is not simply about novelty: for an idea to be truly creative it is vital that it is both appropriate and useful (Henry 1991). Creativity in organizations has been defined as:

“Making a change that sticks (for a while)” (Talbot 1997:181).

The debate about creativity within agency-client relations in advertising has recently widened beyond concern with advertising per se to integrated marketing communications (Cook 1996; Michell 1998). Rickards (1998), echoing Talbot (1997) has argued that creativity should be concerned as much with how things are done as it is with what is finally produced. Therefore, whilst the innovation process can be seen on a micro scale within individuals, the organisation itself represents a larger form of a creativity generating process (Handy 1996); and is also an important site for investigating creativity as both product and service. Creativity has been divided into four distinct elements (Henry 1991): person; process; place and product1 and these provide the recurring themes for this study.

1 Person – creative people generate ideas, innovators are then responsible for the application of these ideas. The creative person will have distinct traits including: a high tolerance of ambiguity and risk, independent thinking, low inhibitions towards conformity, good communication skills, an active imagination, and a basic level of intelligence. Process – the ‘practice’ of creativity, the course of creative action, and the operational basis for creativity. Viewing creativity as a wider construct, Henry argues that there are two important forces competing within the process, i.e. imaginative thought (expansive in nature) as opposed to evaluative thinking (convergent in nature). Each has a differing role to play depending on the stage of process development. Place – societal climate, structure and culture have a major impact upon creative output.

5

Creative level and creative style Creativity has been extensively explored at the individual level (e.g. Perkins2). However, in their examination of creative people, Isaksen and Dorval (1993) drew a distinction between creative level and creative style . Creative level refers to how well individuals use their creative capacity or how much of these abilities individuals possess. When level is the focus or concern, the concept of creativity is linked to ability, capacity, or competence. When dealing with style, in contrast, the emphasis is on modality, preference, propensity, manner or form. Creative style refers to how people prefer to use their creativity (Figure 1).

Isaksen and Dorval (1993) argue that the level-style distinction has two major implications for understanding creativity within organizations. First, it can be used to effectively sort and organise creativity characteristics into meaningful categories (see Figure 1). Second, it may help broaden creative understanding so as to demystify the concept and validate a wider variety of creative styles. Isaksen and Dorval (1993) therefore hypothesised that creativity exists in all people, in different forms and at different levels, and that it is more productive and appropriate to focus on what creativity looks like when people use it rather than classifying creativity into one type or another. Their framework supported earlier research that a ‘creative cycle’ has different stages requiring different creative skills and attributes, for instance ‘softer’ idea generation stages compared with ‘harder’ executional control and strategy formation stages (Bruner 1965) as found in an industry such as advertising. Similarly, Mednick (1962) argued that different problems within the creative process required different personal styles in order to maximise optimum solutions. Therefore, Isaksen and Norval’s (1993) model informed our exploration and interpretation of ‘the cycle of creativity’ within advertising.

Product – what is to be developed, i.e. the tangible outcome of the creative process (derived from Henry 1991) 2 Perkins’ Snowflake Model of Creativity (cited in Henry 1991:13) included a strong commitment to a personal aesthetic; the ability to excel in finding problems; mental mobility; willingness to take risks; acceptance of failure as part of the creative quest and the ability to learn from such failure; inner motivation and the ability to act form the driving force behind creative effort.

6

Figure 1: Sorting Creative Characteristics Using the Level-Style Distinction

Source: Isaksen and Dorval (1993)

AGENCY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS Agency-client relationships represent an important cultural, emotional and social context for the creative cycle. Wackman, Salmon and Salmon (1987) viewed agency-client relationships as evolutionary, proposing four stages of an Agency-Client Lifecycle: pre-relationship; development; maintenance and termination, with a set of associated factors. Organisational factors, work product and work patterns have an effect on how the relationship climate evolves (Figure 2). However, the relationship climate has a reciprocal influence on each of the other three factors. Wackman, Salmon and Salmon (1987) argued that the chemistry between people has a major influence on the quality of the work product that is developed; on the types and success of the work patterns established; and on the organisational factors involved in the relationship. In short, the agency-client relationship is central to the creative process from which creative products and services (such as successful advertising, media planning and integrated marketing communications) emerge.

Adaptively

Creative

Provides sufficiency or originality

ResourcefulEfficientPrecisePlanful

Consistent

Low-Creative Adapters

Submissive – accepts domination

DogmaticDull

RigidRisk averse

Compliant

Unrelated to Style

Intellectual competence

Open to experience

Motivated and energetic

Sense of personal

destiny (belief in self)

High level of domain-

relevant skills and

knowledge

Unrelated to Style

Lack of meaning in life Self defeating

Gives up in the face of adversity

Emotionally unstable Anxious Stubborn

Innovatively

Creative

Proliferates originality Intuitive Ingenious Insightful Spontaneous Unconventional Low-Creative Innovators Reluctant to commit to any particular course of action Impractical Self-centred Abrasive Undependable Capricious risk-taker

HIGH LEVEL CREATIVITY

LOW LEVEL CREATIVITY

7

Figure 2: Elements of the Agency-Client Relationships

Source: Wackman, Salmon and Salmon (1987, p24)

CREATIVITY IN AGENCY-CLIENT RELATIONS Clients and advertising agencies both view creativity as broad, multifaceted and protracted in nature (Michell, 1984). Within the advertising industry it is acknowledged that the creative process is not necessarily sequential:

‘Creative development is often an anarchic, inefficient, meandering process, with many routes down cul-de-sacs before hitting the open road.’ (Hinton 1997, p9)

Creative work does not always flow from creative briefs; in some cases agencies often write the brief in a post hoc manner after completing the work, presenting the work to the client in reverse. This can be seen as a game (Hinton 1997) in which both agencies and clients cooperate or collude in order to maintain the accepted view (even if it is a ‘fiction’) about the direction of the creative process and ‘flow’. Cultural and emotional factors have been identified as potentially the most important blocks (Parnes 1963) to creativity within agency-client relations as they emphasise the effects of conformity, excessive faith in reason and logic, perfectionism, reliance on authority, fear of failure and an

Work

Product Creative strategy

Creative execution

Media planning

Media buying

Research

Marketing strategy (sometimes)

Work

Pattern Authority structure

Approval process

Deadlines and timing

Productivity of meetings

Quality of

communication

Organisational

Factors Corporate policy

Organisational structure

Organisational politics

Marketing strategy

Personnel factors: competence, experience

Relationship

Factors

Rapport/comfort

Energy level

Trust/respect

Control patterns

Personnel turnover

8

overemphasis on competition or co-operation. Thus, for advertising agencies managing creative understanding within agency-client relationships is central to success. Advertising agencies must navigate ‘hard’ client needs through a ‘soft’ creative advertising process. Douglas (1979) argued that clients should demand a ‘shared creative perspective’ from their agencies. The effective integration of tightly written briefs and freethinking creative idea generation is therefore seen as a key test of advertising agencies’ success.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Following Alvesson (1994) we use a conceptual figure as a “loose contour” which “does not capture everything” but is “about understanding (discovering) the dominant ideas within the object of study [rather] than a particular theoretical concept (frame of reference) to guide the study” (Alvesson 1994:557). Within this conceptual framework, the creative product is the core feature of the creative process in the agency-client partnership. The quality of the creative product is dependent upon the diligence and cooperativeness of both agency and client. De Bono (1982) proposed the careful and persistent application of effort (i.e. diligence) as a vital characteristic in the management of personal creativity. Applying this label in an organisational context allows research to focus on the

Figure 3: Conceptual Framework – The Creative Process

Creative Product

AGENCY CLIENT

Client Cooperativeness

Agency Cooperativeness

Client Diligence

Agency Diligence

Strategic Awareness

Interdependence

Belief Systems

Trust & Respect

Culture & Ethos

Rapport & Communication

9

management of the creative process within client-agency relationships. In addition, agencies and clients require cooperativeness in all their communications if an effective relationship is to be established. Cooperativeness refers to a long-term commitment on both sides of the relationship and involves key elements such as trust, goodwill, reliability and partnership. The most important attributes specifically contributing to the success of the process are highlighted within the broader concentration of agency-client cooperativeness and diligence and include: culture and ethos; belief systems; interdependence; strategic awareness; trust and respect; and rapport and communication. All these elements interact to determine the quality of the creative product which emerges from the creative process.

10

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The research objective was to explore how creativity is represented, understood and constituted within agency-client relations in the UK advertising industry. RESEARCH DESIGN An ethnographic approach3 was adopted. Data was collected during four weeks’ field study with a full-service advertising agency using participant observation, interviews and a fieldwork journal. This approach was used in order to overcome potential environmental barriers in the advertising industry; to obtain an understanding of the dynamics of the creative process; and to experience the practicalities of client/agency creative interactions. The field study provided opportunities for insights into the role of account managers on a day-to-day basis, while interaction with account directors, account planners, media managers and creatives was part of the regular work pattern. Observation of these individuals and their interaction with clients and internal agency departments were the basis of this research. RESEARCH SITE A large multi-national full-service advertising agency was chosen because of its size, its client base and for its range of services (Table 1).

Table 1: Agency Characteristics

Agency Characteristics Agency Studied

Date Established 1944

Number Employed (London) 160

Head Office New York

World-wide Billings (1997) £2.2 billion

£140 million

3 We use the term ‘ethnographic approach’ rather than ethnography. Ethnography usually involves “extended participant observation.. [where] at least a year is devoted to the task” (Sanday 1979:527). However we follow Van Maanen in arguing that ethnographic research “can be distinguished from participant observation on several grounds one of which is that of its broader aim, the analytic description of a culture. This paper… regards any social study as at least partially ethnographic if it allows a researcher to become immersed in the everyday life of the observed … Procedurally, the ethnographic method is described by Conklin (1968:172) as involving ‘a long period of intimate study and residence in a well-defined community employing a wide range of observational techniques including prolonged face-to-face contact with members of local groups, direct participation in some of the group’s activities, and a greater emphasis on intensive work with informants than on the use of documentary or survey data’” (Van Maanen 1979:539-540). Also, we follow Alvesson and Skoldberg’s argument (2000:45) that “if the object of study is not an alien local community but some part of the researcher’s own society.. the time requirement is generally less, since the researcher already has considerable knowledge of the general context in which the study object is located”. Prior to undertaking the four weeks’ field study, the researcher had spent ten months on placement working with the same advertising agency in a different location.

11

London Office Billings (1997)

U.K. Ranking by Size (by billings 1997) 14

Media Split 53% TV, 28% Radio,

15% Press, 3%

Outdoor, 1% Other

Source: Advertisers Annual 72nd Edition

METHOD

Material was collected using participant observation and interviews. In order to accurately describe incidents a fieldwork journal was also used in the data collection process (Sherry, 1996). Short descriptions and quotations were noted at the time of the various incidences and expanded upon later in order to provide the detailed accounts that are presented in this study. The collection of data from participant observations and interviews is represented in this study in the form of thick description from a naturalistic stance (Sherry, 1996) (see below). The thick description makes explicit the detailed pattern of cultural and social relationships and places them in context. The material collected has been reduced to a number of short descriptive prose pieces. Fleeting impressions as well as detailed descriptions of events are combined to enrich the reflective context of the study. The researcher brought with him advanced knowledge of the industry and the agency environment. Sherry (1996) notes that this may enable the researcher to better appreciate the environment within which the study is taking place. However, Sherry (1996) warns that researchers must be aware of their cultural significance within the environment and therefore account for bias during the process of reflection and analysis. In the case of the advertising industry, background knowledge is exceptionally important. Language barriers arising from the use of ‘buzz words’ or specialist terminology contribute to concealing data from the uninitiated researcher. In addition, many of the stories told and the jokes made by agency employees are specific to the industry and are often illustrated with examples of agency personalities and advertising processes4. Presentation The data is reported by a combination of two established methods of presenting ‘tales’ (Van Maanen 1988). In lines with the traditional realist tale5, the prose is written in the third person so as to add an element of neutrality and objectivity to the work. It provides a native’s point of view and highlights ‘ordinary’ working practices which may not otherwise be observed or may simply be overlooked or taken for granted (Schein 1985:113). In common with the impressionist tale6 this study also presents the data in a more creative and imaginative way. Each account is written in a differing style, from broadly conceptual to highly detailed and structured, incorporating description, analysis and interpretation (Holloway, 1997). In addition, the fieldworker has a place in some of the tales.

4 The details of all of the people, places and organisations described in this study have been anonymized, apart from Ben, the researcher. This is in accordance with research confidentiality assurances given at the time of study. 5 Realist tales: “provide a rather direct, matter-of-fact portrait of the studied culture..” (Van Maanen 1988:7) 6 Impressionist tales “are personalized accounts of fleeting moments of fieldwork cast in dramatic form; they therefore carry elements of both realist and confessional writing” (Van Maanen 1988:7).

12

Analysis and interpretation

Following description, the data analysis was carried out to identify patterns, themes and linkages amongst ideas (Sherry, 1996; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995) in order to build theory. The metaphors of theatre and war are central to the exploration of the social practices (Rabinow 1984:241), most notably in the execution and enactment of power and control within agency-client interactions (both within the agency and between agency personnel and clients). The cultural categories of person, place and time represent the main sites for analysis in searching for the cultural principles within the tales which elucidate the webs of significance of different subgroups of actors within the agency and client company and how they represent, constitute and understand creativity. From here, we seek to identify the disjunctures and silences in order to build from emic to etic perspectives… (Arnould and Wallendorf 1994).

TELLING TALES/DESPATCHES FROM THE FRONT

TALE 1: The Stage: The Agency Environment 1.1 Front stage and front of house: physical setting/place The building housing the agency was cloaked in an overcoat of dark green tarpaulins punctured here and there by the site of naked scaffolding and small areas of bare stonework. The agency sprawled across the upper three floors; pan-European accounts at the top, the main UK agency operations in the middle, and complementary networks and UK agency spill-over at the bottom. The main activity occurred on the middle floor, which housed all of the main UK agency functions. These included the creative department, all the senior account planners and account managers, the client meeting rooms, the pre-production facilities, the editing suites and the finance department (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Agency, Middle Floor

Reception Area

Creative Department

Senior Account Managers & Planners

Production & Traffic

Editing & Post-Production

Finance Department

Conference Rooms

Managing Partners Offices

The ‘Pigpen’

Typography

Stairs

Lift

Lift

13

The main reception on the fourth floor was the first point of call for most people visiting the agency as ‘outsiders’. The reception area was a small but bright room lit by a large French window on one of its sides. The two side walls each comprised lift doors while the front entrance to the rest of the agency opened up the final side of the square room. To one side of the entrance sat a small unimposing reception desk with little more than a telephone on display. The floors were beech wood and potted plants littered the scattered beech coffee tables. On the walls were framed pieces of art composed entirely of a collection of the agency’s sharpest advertisements. Finally in one of the walls was sunk a television set that played a medley of the agency’s finest commercials. The reception led into a corridor that guided visitors toward a small cluster of large offices and meeting rooms. The offices housed managing partners behind walls of glass and conference style meeting rooms with large televisions and projector screens. This area played host to the majority of client-agency meetings and formed a fascia behind which the rest of the agency lived. Most clients visiting the agency never got any further than this first corridor, although tours of the facility were a regular part of the initiation ceremony for new clients. However, on the whole clients were contained in a small yet exclusive area of the agency along with the top agency personnel. The reason for positioning top management at the front of the agency appeared two fold. First, top managers were able to keep in touch with agency comings and goings by looking through their glass walls into the corridor. This kept them in touch with client and agency activity. In one case a junior account manager was heard to say:

“If I arrive late in the morning I make sure I creep up the back stairs – I don’t like Tom and Steve (Managing Partners) to see how late I am” Peter, Junior Agency Account Manager

Second, the top managers working away in their offices were on show to passing clients who were flattered by their proximity to the partners. Inviting clients into an area of such high-perceived importance reaffirmed their belief that they were important to the agency. 1.2 Backstage Beyond the sight of most clients were the functional areas of the agency. Rather than grouping employees on the basis of account teams the floors were grouped into departmental areas. Further down the corridor and around the corner from the client greeting area sat the senior account managers and account planners. On the other side of the corridor was an area nicknamed the ‘Pigpen’. This large open-plan room was home to a pool of secretaries and a few junior account handlers. The area was an all-together eclectic mix of files, videotapes, filing cabinets, computers and photocopiers and the floors were permanently littered with ‘mood boards’ and creative rough ideas. The décor was also mis-matched and the space far more limited than in the orderly client meeting area down the corridor. Even at the end of the day when everyone had disappeared to his or her homes the place had a sense of fun and energy. Speaking of this area one agency employee commented;

“I have professional friends who love this place. They love the mess and confusion, the junk stuck on the walls, the eclectic mix of bits and bobs – and these are 30+ year old stockbrokers who work in marble filled office blocks in the City… and they they’re so jealous of my working environment – can you believe it? Look at this place!” Robert, Agency Account Director

Beyond the planning and account management area lay a zone of transition (a liminal area). The production and traffic departments acted as gatekeepers for the creative department, running work schedules and holding ‘job bags’ or archives of all the creative work in progress. Time with typographers, production staff and creative teams were also managed from here and as such this was busy area at all times of the day and night.

14

The creative department itself looked more like a school art room than a commercial facility. Each of the creative teams consisted of a Copywriter and an Art Director who each had a small office that opened out onto a large reception area. In the middle of reception was a desk that handled incoming visitors and fielded phone calls. Surrounding it were an assortment of comfortable chairs and sofas and an extensive wooden floor. A seemingly large proportion of the time, groups of three or four gathered into the small rooms to mull over creative ideas or to discuss the latest agency gossip. The rooms usually contained a portable stereo and a small sofa littered with clothes, artwork, official looking briefing documents and the odd videotape. The walls were usually covered with photos, product memorabilia and hand-drawn caricatures of agency staff. The majority of the time the groups kept very much to themselves, scribbling away on pieces of paper or sitting back in their chairs with thoughtful expressions on their faces. There was no doubt that work was produced in the department, but it was obvious that it was done without the hustle and bustle of the account handling departments down the corridor. At the other end of the middle floor was the neatly organised area of finance management. Postproduction facilities and editing suites also shared this area along with the company lawyer and other administrative operations. This area was quiet and conservative, well organised and comparable in atmosphere to the accounts department of any large organisation. 1.3 People: Account handlers versus creatives The double doors separating the account handlers from the creatives apparently divided the agency into two very different types of animal. The researcher’s assumed role as an account handler was instantly noted by all that were introduced to him and it was soon apparent that the informal groups were firstly divided between account handlers and creatives. It soon became obvious that the creatives disliked account handlers for several reasons. First, they trusted account handlers to take artwork to show to the client. Often handlers would came back to tell the creative that the piece of art work they had spent 15 hours working on was unsuitable, or that the client simply did not like it. This was particularly hard to take when the creative concerned had also thought of the idea and loved the piece he or she had created. Second, even when the client accepted the idea it would nearly always need to be altered or edited. This was a long and laborious process for the creative who had produced what her or she considered to be the best possible draft from the outset. Account handlers viewed the process from another angle. When specifically questioned about this issue Robert concisely presented his point of view:

“Creatives have no grip on the functional purpose of the creative ad – guidance always comes from the handlers and often from the client” Robert, Agency Account Director

This quote appeared to be particularly appropriate on a number of occasions over the period of the month’s field work experience. Copywriters would regularly have to be checked for strategic flaws in the copy, art directors would redesign corporate logos, while typographers would delete lines of text in order to make the copy better fit the page. Another account handler noted other ‘irresponsible’ behaviour arising from the creatives. The perceived lack of workflow from the creative department was a hot issue in the account handling department, where the managers often appeared boggled by the sedate atmosphere and the relaxed attitude of the creative department. To the account people who spent their days rushing around from one job to the next the creative department seemed to lack organisation and co-ordination.

“There is no structure within agencies – if you don’t want to do something you can usually pass the buck and get away without doing it. Procrastination, ignorance and avoidance are all rife in the non-client facing roles of an agency” Mark, Agency Account Manager

15

The view that generally came across was that the account managers viewed the creatives and other production supporting roles as intellectually challenged. Indeed it appeared that most of the creatives were less academically qualified than their account management partners, and this led to communication difficulties and a lack of cohesion. A gulf extended between the varying departments and although interpersonal conflict was not explicit in the majority of cases, it was apparent that membership of different informal groups was primarily differentiated by the department in which individuals worked. TALE 2: The Players: Trust and the Agency-Client Relationship 2.1 Agency account team The agency holds a global account with a large management consultancy firm (Figure 5). The researcher was assigned to this account on the first day of the work placement and introduced to the account team. On the agency side, the team consisted of an Account Manager, Mark, who managed the daily functioning of the account. It was his job to supervise the process of getting advertising produced, to oil the advertising wheels and to generally maintain momentum throughout the course of the campaign process. This involved extracting the best possible work via liaison with internal departments and outside agencies. In addition, Mark responded to all the client’s ad hoc requests and was in charge of ensuring that every ‘t’ was crossed, every ‘i’ was dotted, and every deadline was met. In effect, Mark acted as a channel of communication between the client and their marketing communication (marcom) agencies. Directly above Mark in the agency hierarchy was an Account Director, Robert. His role in the relationship was more strategic and as a result he was less concerned with the daily grind normally associated with co-ordinating an advertising account. Robert’s role was to manage the strategic elements of the account, to liaise with clients regarding key issues, and to ultimately carry the weight of overall responsibility. Robert’s role also included co-ordinating the efforts of the junior account team members and the provision of support for them in times of extraordinary work pressure. In effect, Robert’s role was to ensure the long-term success of the account and thus safeguard the stability of the relationship. Ben worked closely with Mark on a daily basis. Due to the rapid turnover of work and the cross-functional nature of the projects undertaken, the roles of the account manager and account director often overlapped. Projects tended to have tactical and strategic elements and to ensure the successful completion of jobs on time ‘cross-tasking’ was practised commonly by agency account teams. As a result, Ben had a close working relationship with the account director, carrying out ad hoc requests as required. 2.2 Client consultancy company The client firm was a consultancy company which had a reputation for being process-orientated, even if it preached dynamism and creative thinking to its own clients. The apparent obsession with a tightly controlled process was one that consultancy employees widely accept as an organisational characteristic. The marketing communications policy operated by the client organisation was a testament to its bureaucratic hierarchy. As a result the policy was one that was resented by both the agency and client personnel who were forced to abide by its rules. The client consultancy firm was committed to adhering to guidelines laid down in a worldwide publication. The thorough brief laid down an extensive set of parameters concerning the development and implementation of marketing communications. These parameters influenced all areas of the marketing communications mix right down to the minimum type face sizes to be used in different types of magazines, and the distinct shades of colour to be used to demonstrate certain brand values.

16

All elements of the marketing communications mix were scrutinised and briefed from the New York headquarters. The result was a document several hundred pages in length.

2.3 Client company’s marketing communications team In the client consulting firm’s London marketing office, Libby, the UK Marketing Assistant was responsible for daily advertising activity. Her role opposite Mark on the agency side, was to ensure the agency kept to deadlines and progressed through all the stages of advertising development in the correct order. Being a process-orientated organisation Libby’s role was prescribed by protocol and attention to detail. Phone calls to the agency would be frequent and evidence of agency work standards requested at all stages of the campaign’s development. Above Libby in the chain of command was Andrea. Andrea’s title was Advertising Manager, and as such it was her responsibility to manage the account in the UK. In addition, Andrea acted as the regional marketing communications supervisor across Europe, the Middle East, Africa and India (labelled ‘EMEAI’). Andrea’s background as an ex-agency account director provided her with vast experience of a wide range of accounts at the highest level. Her record for thorough work and ‘no messing’ style made her a well-respected figure on both sides of the relationship. In the eyes of the agency she was seen very much as the client, with agency employees working for ‘her’ as opposed to for ‘the consultancy firm’. Her role as chief client in London was only overshadowed by the role of the parent company in decision-making. All UK marketing communications activities were heavily policed from its head office in New York. With the balance of power lying across the Atlantic, Andrea followed the tight controls that were put in place by the head office to ensure uniformity in the communications message. This was time consuming and regularly frustrating due to the fragile deadlines regularly experienced.

Figure 5: Agency-Client Interaction

CLIENT MARCOMS

TEAM

Andrea (Advertising & Eurasia Manager) responsible for strategic issues and supervision of UK marketing activity. Libby (UK Marketing Assistant) responsible for the daily functioning of UK marketing activity.

Account Handlers

Robert (Account Director) and Mark (Account Manager) responsible for the smooth running of the account on a daily basis.

Media Managers

Comprised UK media team and Pan-European media team. Pan-Euro team directly in contact with London client concerning Eurasia issues.

Further Agency Functions

Account Planners, Creatives and all other agency functions lie in this section. They are utilised by the client through the account handling team on an adhoc basis.

AGENCY ACCOUNT TEAM

Eurasia countries co-ordinated by London marcoms team and agency pan-European media teams.

17

In addition to these frustrations the local London client also lacked control over the development of the main marketing communications message. Development of an annual global campaign consistently took place in the United States. Frustration was increased due to the agency headquarters being located also in the US. The development of advertising was not therefore a controllable variable as far as the local London client office and London agency were concerned. To complicate matters further, the distance between the local London client and the consultancy’s head office prohibited a great deal of personal contact. As a result the London advertising team were unable to add much to the creation of new campaigns. 2.4 Agency media Other account team members included representatives from the agency media department. Part of the reason for Andrea’s appointment as the consultancy organisation’s regional co-ordinator was the existence of the London agency’s European media department. From the office of the London agency, pan-European media buying and strategic planning was conducted. The agency gained media synergies in terms of both strategic knowledge and buying power that provided a cross-cultural advantage to all those in the agency network. The presence of pan-European media in London provided Andrea with the necessary leverage to gain the role as co-ordinator of media activity across Europe.

2.5 Off stage/centre stage: directing the play: New York – London relationships

In addition, the consultancy headquarters in New York found it a distinct advantage to add the Middle East and some parts of Asia to the European region, forming a specialist area known as ‘Eurasia’. The reason for this was that most of these nations had a small marketing team with little knowledge of how best to co-ordinate their creative efforts. As the regional supervisor, Andrea was entrusted with the responsibility for allocating marketing communications funds to all those countries in the Eurasia region. Her role as regional ‘policeman’ also involved making sure the consultancy organisation’s marketing communication policies were adhered to and that the process guidelines were followed. In a number of cases countries were known for their poor book keeping skills and resistance to standardisation of their marketing communication programmes. In these cases Andrea would be responsible for ‘ironing out’ differences and liaising with Eurasia member representatives to clarify problems and offer potential solutions. In this role she was particularly effective, to the delight of the global client in New York. The European media department in the local London advertising agency therefore had an important part to play. Their analytical skills and media knowledge were well respected by Andrea who through her previous role within agencies knew the competitive advantages that could be gained through sound media advice. Other core agency roles such as account planning and creative were not as important to Andrea. In effect, the planners and creatives operated more as ‘free-lance’ departments that were utilised as required rather than as part of an autonomous account team. As the major creative campaigns were developed in the States, these departments were rarely involved in agency-client transactions, and were given little to do with Eurasia operations. 2.6 Rehearsals: managing the client-agency interface: status meetings The local London account team would meet for regular status meetings once a week to review the past week’s activity and to decide on future courses of action. All account handlers, media managers (UK and European) and the client’s marketing communications team would attend these meetings which were usually held at the client’s offices in central London. Mark and Ben would collate a Status Report once a week before the meeting. The purpose of this document was to provide a framework for guiding the attendees through a list of the week’s events. Throughout the meetings various members

18

of the account team would report back on the week’s progress, and the ‘open atmosphere’ allowed members to raise concerns and other points of issue. Despite the regularity of the meetings they were never informal affairs. Before leaving for the client on a Tuesday afternoon the agency staff would liaise with Robert, even if this was only for a few minutes before getting into a taxi. Quite often the agency had a hidden agenda attached to the regular business meetings. Sometimes this agenda would include a straightforward request for more time, the airing of a problem with production costs or the need for more information to complete a given task. Irrespective of the magnitude of the problem the agency account team was always wary of how it approached Andrea. In some cases, Robert and Mark would spend long periods of time deciding how and when to raise key issues. In the majority of cases the issues would be addressed and dealt with swiftly with no problem, but the agency team always liked to be well prepared and thorough planning was seen as vital to achieving a ‘good result’ for the agency. Part of the reason for caution in raising irregular issues was that Andrea was known to be conclusive in her decision-making. Once she made a decision she would stick to it, therefore meaning that the agency had to get the right answer from her on the first time of asking. To gain the best result for the agency, the agency account team would have to use their interpersonal skills to put across the strongest message at the best time. Robert once commented;

“… as a general rule you’ll find that 50 per cent of the results you gain in the (agency-client) relationship will come through ‘actual achievement’ and the other 50 per cent will come through presentation. How well you present yourself will determine how well you are received.” Robert, Agency Account Director

By discussing issues in advance back at the agency, Mark and Robert were assured of a unified approach to the problem and the presentation of a concerted agency standpoint in front of the client. This divide between agency and client was very noticeable to the researcher in his position as an agency ‘insider’. The agency account team would approach some topics from a well-planned position before breaking the bad news or delivering the request for a budget or time extension. The account team would sometimes describe the status meetings in terms of war; often referring to the relationship as a ‘battle’ or ‘struggle’. This was a particularly common trait amongst most of the agency representatives when campaign launch times were growing close. From the client side there was always a sense of uncertainty. Libby positioned herself as the guardian of brand detail and as such kept a sharp eye on the agency to ensure that client procedures were followed precisely. Andrea was less concerned with the detail and let Libby concentrate her efforts on instilling precision at all stages. As an ex-agency employee Andrea appeared to have a higher propensity for uncertainty and liked to be perceived as allowing the agency to have as much room as necessary to carry out its tasks unsupervised. However those inside the agency viewed her with suspicious eyes and thought that any ‘orders’ from Libby were simply passed down from Andrea. 2.7 Strategic versus tactical issues Despite the apparent divisions over some tactical issues the London agency and client shared a better relationship over strategic issues such as the vision for the future of the brand and the aims for marketing communications in the long term. The New York client’s headquarters seemed not only a world away from the London agency, but also from its own local client. By the same token, there was a degree of psychic distance between the ‘lead’ agency in New York and the local London agency. Cultural distance, a fundamentally different set of problems and a different set of constraints hammered a wedge between agency and client parents and their locally based children. Both agency and client personnel were openly heard to question whether their global parents harboured their best interests. As a result the local London agency and client developed a special understanding of one another’s problems and strategically a shared perspective arose.

19

The result was that the London client and the London agency became closer to one another than they were to their respective organisational ‘mother’. Issues over budget allocations for example were not always seen as in the interest of the countries concerned. In one instance work commissioned in the UK for recruitment print ads was abandoned at the insistence of the global client in New York and replaced with ‘inferior’ creative work sent from the States. All of this tension between headquarters and local offices helped create a local client-agency understanding, giving rise to a bizarre air of false trust and faith in one another. The balance of trust was fragile and as much as both sides developed a close working relationship they were well aware of the ‘agency-client’ format of the relationship. In this respect both agency and client were wary of one another’s actions.

TALE 3: The Play: Bureaucracy and Creative Development 3.1 Creativity in the agency-client relationship: the struggle for control The creative process clearly extended well beyond the double doors of the ‘Creative Department’ (Figure 4) as could be seen in the case of the large consultancy account described above. There was a lack of tactical cohesion between the London agency and the London client. However, the agency-client relationship operated much more effectively at a strategic level and was fuelled by the concerted efforts of the Agency Account Director, Robert, and the Client Advertising Manager, Andrea. It was openly discussed that the long-term goal for the account in the eyes of both Andrea and Robert was the transfer of the main creative contract from the United States to the UK. This entailed developing creative ideas for an annual campaign at the London agency and thus the co-ordination of the strategy from London rather than from New York. The hope was that in this way the local agency would gain extra revenue and prestige and the local client would gain a greater control over the advertising process and management of the Eurasia region. However, both sides foresaw difficulties in ‘wresting’ the account from the US. First, the two headquarters (agency and client) were overseas alongside one another. They had developed a good relationship over the five years since the New York office of the agency had won the account. Second, the balance of power lay in the US. Both agency and client top management were in the States and neither would have any interest at all in seeing the account leave the New York offices for London. To hinder matters further, the lines of communication were established and strong, the account teams were happy, and profits on both sides were high. In addition, the strong bureaucratic core of the consultancy organisation was happy to house the advertising account in its building where it could watch over those who worked on its marketing communications. For these reasons both London offices had resigned themselves to satellite positions in the main advertising process, at least in the short term. 3.2 Displaying creative flair Despite a lack of control over the development of the core advertising campaign, the local agency and client found other ways to display their creative flair. One such source of creative potential was through the use of media. The use of media was a resource which Andrea and Robert recognised as a potential source of leverage. As co-ordinator of the Eurasia region, Andrea could organise innovative media bursts and had the autonomy to experiment with a wide array of media vehicles, which often won valuable recognition from the partners in New York. Another area where the local London client could demonstrate a use of creative skill was in the production of recruitment ads. Recruitment at all levels of the organisation and in all parts of the world had become a large issue for the rapidly expanding consultancy firm. In the marketing

20

communications arena it was deemed appropriate to create a series of ads on a local client basis. The agencies, both in the New York head office and at a local level, encouraged this philosophy and argued a case for the positive effects of tailoring the media message toward individual marketplaces. This was agreed as a very necessary and potentially effective course of action and one which was pursued by a number of large regional clients who finally saw the chance to effectively target new and experienced hires in a way which suited their individual needs and expectations. In London, the main consultancy partners were glad to have been given the autonomy to advertise for new personnel in a way that they saw fit. Similarly, Andrea and the rest of the marketing team were pleased to gain control of a locally managed project. First, it gave the local London agency-client partnership an opportunity to showcase their creative talents and impress the partners in New York. Good creative work at this stage was seen to be a distinct advantage if London were to grab the main creative production process in the future. Second, the construction of creative products added an extra dimension of interest and excitement to the jobs of those working in the marketing department. Part of the enhanced job interest was due to the client’s need to work closer with their creative advertising agency. This element of fun and involvement in the creation of an advertising product appeared to be a distinct advantage in gaining the enthusiasm of the local client. Both Libby and Andrea took great satisfaction in the involvement with the full advertising process. This process involved account planners being called in to aid the development of strategy, concepts brainstormed, creatives briefed, and initial work produced. Various meetings would be scheduled to exhibit the latest pre-production sketches that had been produced by the creative department. The clients were invited to review creative ideas and to decide with account managers about what was suitable and what was deemed inappropriate. This process was very involving and obviously gave the client a great deal of satisfaction. 3.3 Account handler’s role in managing creativity within agency-client relations The client’s decision-making process concerning the choice of one campaign idea over another was obviously a complex process. One thing that soon became apparent however, was the importance of the role of the account handler in aiding this decision. Account managers would bury those ideas that the agency wanted to be forgotten and bring to the fore those which they, the creatives, and the account planners wanted to see as executions. The power to ‘guide’ the decision-making process at this stage seemed to make the difference between a good account team and a bad one, or at least in the eyes of those in the creative department. The campaign chosen for the recruitment ads was one that the agency favoured from the outset, and was sold to the client by Robert over a period of two hours one Tuesday afternoon. The campaign would run in the form of print ads in various national newspapers and magazines around the UK. Both the client and the agency loved the set of six executions and took them to present to the global client in the States. The laborious process that followed was far less straightforward. Once a campaign was decided upon by the local London client it was up to the New York client and agency to approve the campaign format. In the following weeks the type sizes, background colours, copy length and logo dimensions would all be altered back and forth. Mark once commented that this was not an exceptional account in this respect.

“… it is usual for the creative strategy to be developed over a period of two months. With smaller campaign such as this a creative product normally takes an extra two weeks or less. We then spend a further two weeks or more negotiating minute details with the client.” Mark, Agency Account Manager

21

Combining media skill and the agency’s creative talents the agency proposed the sponsorship of a current affairs or news programme on satellite television. The result was the sponsorship of a CNN programme that fitted target audience demographics and gave a broad pan-European viewing audience. Similar excitement over the creative process was provided when the local London client instigated the formation of ‘idents’ to run at the beginning and end of the programme and as break ‘bumpers’ between commercial breaks. Again strong creative work was developed and cleared with New York. Once again bureaucracy slowed the process. Despite this, following the rigid guidelines imposed by New York, Andrea gained valuable commendations not only for her strong creative vision but also for her solid managerial skills. She recognised that if the major creative work were to be carried out in the UK in the future, creative leadership more than the creative idea would be the vital consideration from the partners across the Atlantic.

DISCUSSION We begin by reviewing client-agency perceptions of the creative process, and then discuss the implications of client-agency views of the creative process. The factors influencing advertising creativity are then reviewed: ethos; process; environment; and team.

THE CREATIVE CYCLE: PROCESS AND PRODUCT

Perceptions of creativity

Earlier research (Michell 1984) had indicated that both clients and advertising agencies viewed creativity as broad, multifaceted and protracted in nature, and these aspects were confirmed here. However, some differences were also identified in this study. It was clear, for example, that clients viewed creativity as a structured process compared to some agency personnel who placed greater stress on spontaneity. The sense of fun (represented by the Pigpen) echoed earlier studies:

“It is important that people are having fun and can laugh; that advertising workers are emotionally involved in their tasks; that they are free, independent and even a bit lawless” (Alvesson 1994:549)

However this study showed how the ideas of freedom, independence and lawlessness were descriptors used about the creatives within the agency by the account handlers. The differences in perceptions between the agency and its clients about what constituted creativity led to a number of disagreements which echoed the literature on creativity: intuitive versus analytical thinking; originality versus effectiveness; imagination versus hard work; freedom versus control. There was also evidence to support Rickards’ view (1998) that creativity involves both product and process. These themes all emerged in the ‘tales from the field’.

22

Figure 6: Creative Characteristics Applied to Advertising Function

1. Agency Account Managers/Planners Paradigm 2. Agency Creatives’ Paradigm 3. Client Paradigm (as described by agency participants) Source: Adapted from Isaksen and Norval 1993

There was support for the distinction between creators and communicators in advertising (De Bono 1990), with advertising creatives identifiable as largely creators, and account managers and planners as often being identified with a communication function. In addition, there was support for Isaken and Norval’s (1993) argument that creativity should be differentiated in terms of creative level and creative style. Their model can be adapted (Figure 6) to illustrate the differences between the creative levels of various groups in the creative cycle of advertising.

Adaptively

Creative

Provides sufficiency or originality

ResourcefulEfficientPrecisePlanful

Consistent

Low-Creative Adapters

Submissive – accepts domination

DogmaticDull

RigidRisk averse

Compliant

Unrelated to Style

Intellectual competence

Open to experience

Motivated and energetic

Sense of personal

destiny (belief in self)

High level of domain-

relevant skills and

knowledge

Unrelated to Style

Lack of meaning in life

Self defeating Gives up in the face of

adversity Emotionally unstable

Anxious Stubborn

Innovatively

Creative

Proliferates originality Intuitive Ingenious Insightful Spontaneous Unconventional Low-Creative Innovators Reluctant to commit to any particular course of action Impractical Self-centred Abrasive Undependable Capricious risk-taker

HIGH LEVEL CREATIVITY

LOW LEVEL CREATIVITY

1. 2.

3.

23

Within the High Level Creativity area a distinction could be drawn between adaptive creativity and innovative creativity. The working practices involved in an advertising agency suggested that agency creatives could be broadly classified as innovatively creative, whilst account managers and planners could be described more as adaptively creative. Further research is needed to confirm the grouping of creative characteristics in relation to creative personality types within the context of the U.K. advertising industry. The only statements which can be made about the level and style of creativity in client firms are drawn entirely from the perspective of advertising agencies; and this agency held a generally pessimistic view of the creative level and creative style of its client companies, describing them in terms which fitted into the bottom half of the framework: low level creativity. This rather derogative view of clients echoed earlier research findings about the pejorative use of language when describing clients in the advertising industry (Alvesson 1994:536). [Identity work???? – Alvesson 1994:552]

THE CLIENT-AGENCY RELATIONSHIP

The nature of the client-agency relationship was clearly of central importance to the creation of advertising; and this confirmed earlier research (Michell 1984). However, a number of key differences in the perceptions of the agency-client relationship were revealed by the different perspectives which client and agency personnel brought to their interactions. Both agencies and clients demanded trust as a core characteristic of the relationship. However the ‘trust’ characteristic in the creative process was perceived differently by the two groups. Clients envisaged a reciprocal trust; i.e. they expected the agency to trust them as much as they trusted the agency in the creative cycle. Agency personnel seemed to expect the client’s trust irrespective of the lack of agency trust for the client in many phases of the creative cycle (e.g. Tales 2 &3 7) A number of examples of mistrust could be highlighted between the agency and its clients. In one case (Tales 2 & 38) agencies were found to resent the intervention of clients, particularly over tactical issues. Agencies failed to trust the client with regard to their view of creative decision-making and spent long periods of time discussing how best to ‘facilitate’ the client’s decision-making process (e.g. Tale 29). Mistrust was also evidence within the agency between the account handlers and the creatives (Tale 110). The agency-client relationship was regularly referred to in terms of war, with agencies resenting client intervention in ‘agency business’. However client experience of agency culture was seen as a distinct bonus. One major client headed by an ex-agency marketing manager received a higher standard of service from her agency (Tale 211). New accounts were won on the basis of interpersonal skills and the element of ‘creative promise’ confirming earlier research about the importance of creativity in the choice of advertising agency (Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987:27) and the importance of ‘cultural’ fit in choosing partners (Ogilvy 1983:54). The pitching process was observed to be a resource intensive part of the agency work pattern, and hence one which was taken very seriously. Relationships advance through a series of stages and as the account matures into the ‘Maintenance Stage’, there is a danger of a loss of valuable momentum (Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987). The account can be damaged by the agency presuming to know more about the client’s business than they do, by general neglect on the part of the agency, and by a lack of fresh insight. To ensure high levels of satisfaction are maintained throughout the client-agency relationship the agency often organised mutual events and activities such as ‘Away Days’ in order to promote the evolution of the creative

7 Tale 2.6 Rehearsals: managing the client-agency interface: status meeting & Tale 3.3 Account handler’s role in managing creativity within agency-client relations. 8 Tale 2.2: Client consultancy company & Tale 3.3 Account handler’s role in managing creativity within agency-client relations 9 Tale 2.6: Rehearsals: managing the client-agency interface: status meetings 10 Tale 1.3: People: Account handlers versus creatives. 11 Tale 2.3: Client company’s marketing communications team)

24

process. The away days were well received by both agency and client personnel, who both appeared to gain from the process, socially and professionally. The purpose of these days was to open lines of communication in a relaxed environment, reinforcing the importance of the quality of communication (Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987:24) in agency-client relationships; and demonstrating the important creative role played by account handlers in managing agency-client relationships, thus delivering the service. By meeting on ‘neutral ground’, agencies and clients were able to step outside of their regular relationship structure in order to discuss general points of concern and strategic plans for the future. These days signified an important part of building stable long-term relationships and constituted a significant social gathering for all those involved in the advertising process. Evidence from Tales 2 and 312 supported Winston Fletcher’s (1997) view that clients look for more from their relationships with agencies. Clients were shown to be intent on subjecting all areas of the relationship to detailed evaluation during the pitching process. However, with agency offerings regarded to a certain extent as ‘much of a muchness’, one agency employee argued that the decision-making process was often determined by the theatrical skills of presentation displayed by the account team. Interpersonal skills were also cited as key influencing factors, and as one agency representative warned, the effect of these factors should not be underrated in any area of the advertising process, again highlighting the combination of product and process in the agency-client exchange. THE CREATIVE ETHOS The creative ethos is of central importance to the agency-client relationship and to the creative process, but one that was often ‘taken for granted’ compared with the stress often placed on ‘creative people’. Agency owner David Ogilvy warned that agencies must ‘avoid clients whose ethos is incompatible with your own’ (Ogilvy, 1983, p54). The advertising agency viewed clients as a major constraint on the production of good quality creative work, particularly the creatives (Tale 113). The account handlers regarded the creative product as something that had to be sold to the client which meant that interpersonal skills were vital at all stages of the creative cycle. Presentations were of particular importance to the communication of agency drive and spirit, and were therefore seen as a vital tool of the account handling trade (Tale 314). The field study highlighted clients’ lower propensity toward risk-taking activity and an apparent lack of imagination within the creative process. The creative ethos exhibited by agencies often ran directly contrary to the dominant bureaucratic client philosophy and as such signalled conflicting work expectations (Tale 215). As a result, clients tended to follow their own judgement in the selection of work and in the formulation of strategic plans. With the decision-making power resting in the hands of the client, the agency complained that the work suffered from cuts to creative executions (Tales 1 and 316). This reflected findings in other studies (Alvesson 1994:548-9). Creative knowledge and learning within agency-client relations appeared to be developed through education with ‘creative luminaries’ (Colman, 1991). Clients tended to rely heavily on the quality of the brief and other tangible areas of the creative process that they could control. The ownership of the creative product appeared to be an important issue at all stages of the creative process. Creatives viewed the production of ads according to the perceived level of ‘client disruption’ within the creative process. Although creatives accepted that the client effectively paid for and specified the creative product they separated campaigns according to their control over the process. First, there were those campaigns where the creatives were given autonomous creative control over the project, with clients having little or no

12 Tale 2: Agency media; offstage/centre stage: directing the play: New York-London relationships; strategic versus tactical issues; & Tale 3: Creativity in the agency-client relationship: the struggle for control; displaying creative flair 13 Tale 1: People: Account handlers versus creatives 14 Tale 3.3: Account handler’s role in managing creativity within agency-client relations 15 Tale 2.2: Client consultancy company. 16 Tale 1: People: Account handlers versus creatives & Tale 3.3: Account handler’s role in managing creativity within agency-client relations.

25

intervention over the creative result. In contrast, creatives distinguished those campaigns where the client regularly specified major changes to the original creative idea and instigated daily modifications. Creatives argued that those campaigns that were dramatically altered from their initial conceptual designs rarely got better.

Agencies pursued a number of motives in the production of creative advertising. In addition to securing the client-agency relationship and delighting the client, agencies also sought to promote themselves to prospective new clients. The creation of stunning executions enhanced the agency portfolio and brought attention to the agency in what is still a largely vogue industry. The effectiveness of the creative process was therefore a result of how well the ethos of the client and agency interrelated.

THE CREATIVE PROCESS The creative process was another important factor to the success of the advertising process. Agencies demonstrated a far greater capacity to view creative ‘sparking’ or idea generation as a non-linear process, compared with clients who appeared to be far less comfortable with the nebulous terms associated with creativity and the creative process. This confirmed Henry’s (1991) theory of the creative process. Henry argued that two forces compete in the creative process: imaginative thought (the unexpected leap of imagination) and evaluative thought (the orchestration of a wider framework of the creative process). In addition, Henry added that these two distinct elements fuel the creative process at different stages during the creation of advertising. Frustration and conflicts Frustration was a major theme on both sides of the relationship. Agency personnel complained that although clients asked for more creativity from their advertising products and media spend, they had very little idea of what they actually wanted or the commitment to see projects through to completion. In these cases the agency tended to become frustrated with the client’s indecision and reservation over key decision areas which slowed the creative process. Conversely, on some occasions the clients were felt to make decisions too quickly, resulting in poor outcomes. This confirmed earlier research (Alvesson 1994:548-549). The agency highlighted the potential mismatch between process-driven organisations and the creative process, as another source of conflict. Process-orientated clients were seen as a cause of tension and a source of animosity in the creative process; and tended to hinder elements of creative development. Earlier research (Perkins, cited Henry 1991:13) had identified a number of characteristics necessary to successful creative development. Amongst the characteristics Perkins listed ‘a willingness to take risks’, ‘mental mobility’ and ‘acceptance of failure as part of the creative quest’. These factors were not seen as actively encouraged as desirable traits by the process-orientated and bureaucratic systems of client firms. The result was that the creative process made an uncomfortable bedfellow for the strict process-driven functions of the organisation. The Creative Environment The creative environment was largely taken for granted by those who worked inside the agency. Agency employees were very proud of their environment and the management style used to drive agency progress. Earlier research had suggested that agency management styles were traditional and conservative, however this study suggested that agency management styles varied depending on the function, and the account managers who were nearer the interface with clients also seemed to be closer to more traditional views of management, whilst agency personnel such as creatives who were more removed (physically as well as culturally, emotionally and professionally) from the client, were associated with less bureaucratically based management styles. Within the agency, it was the creatives

26

who fulfilled the criteria which had been identified as central to the habitus (Bourdieu 1979/1984 in Alvesson 1994:535-6 & 539ff) of the advertising industry of being “emancipated, sensitive and difficult to control” (Alvesson 1994:547). The account managers were shown to place a large amount of time and effort into the ‘facilitation’ of clear client decision-making. One agency representative postulated that the development of the creative environment was hindered by what he labelled ‘death by a thousand cuts’. Liaison between producers, directors, senior clients, junior clients and internal departments all took their toll on the creative product, and the account handler responsible. Creative guidance emerged as a vital part of the creative environment. The structure of the agency account teams enabled a constant checking process, with the account manager the ultimate guardian of the creative development process. The ethnography highlighted the problems of leaving creatives to their own devices from the perspective of other members of the agency team, notably the account handlers. Agency representatives postulated that creatives lack strategic direction and should therefore be sufficiently monitored at all stages of the process. In addition, agency account planners and handlers agreed with senior creatives who argued that junior creatives in particular needed to be sheltered from the pressures of the business environment. Thus, creativity was regarded by all concerned as a precious resource, the isolation or quarantining of which was seen as a way to safeguard the development of the creative product. Creativity (or “creative capabilities”, Alvesson 1994:545) played a central role in establishing “professionality and authority” (Alvesson 1994:545) and thus emphasizing distance (Alvesson 1994:544) between the agency and its clients; and also thereby retaining “control of the access to their work tasks” (Alvesson 1994:545) in a professional knowledge based industry without some of the traditional controls afforded to other professions (e.g. law, medicine, accountancy). The importance of the creative directors and their ability to enhance the advertising product was also clearly recognized. Creative directors’ strengths were seen to emerge from an ability to evaluate creative executions and in the application of strategic thinking. They represented par excellence the importance of being “an artist whilst [also] being realistic and market-orientated at the same time” (Alvesson 1994:547). Finally, the physical layout of the agency reinforced departmental differences. Despite this the conclusion arising from the study was that dividing the creative department from the remainder of the agency served a functional purpose. As previously illustrated the full-service agency is home to an eclectic mix of individuals with different skills and talents. Placing creatives in a strongly cohesive unit was observed to strengthen the creative ethos of the department and improve the working environment. Links can also be identified here with the role of habitus in advertising agencies (Alvesson 1994:547). Habitus makes possible a successful use of symbolism. In this agency there were physical distinctions which paralleled the distinctions within the habitus of the different sub-groups within the agency who used “style, ways of expression and means of communicating” in order to “imply originality, competence and professionalism” (Alvesson 1994:547) for their respective sub functions. Some components of the conceptual framework (Figure 8) clearly capture some key aspects of habitus in terms of process and agency-client relationships e.g belief systems; culture and ethos; communication and diligence. The Creative Team The creative team was the other central aspect of the creativity of advertising agencies. Throughout the ethnographically-based study it was observed that the account team operated as a strong cohesive unit. The creatives were not considered part of individual account teams although their contributions to the creative product were essential. In addition, the creatives were geographically positioned in a distinct physical location away from the account handling departments. The ethnographic approach elicited that creatives disagreed that their position in the creative process was a peripheral one, thereby preferring to see themselves as the central focus of the relationship.

27

Within account handling teams there was a large amount of cross-tasking between vertically integrated roles. Account managers and account directors for example, were observed to work in unison on the development of the strategic and tactical functioning of the account. Although each role was prescribed distinct responsibilities, the workload and pace of account handling duties usually demanded intense work schedules, and work sharing was a regular technique employed in order to meet client deadlines. [??? Identity work Alvesson 1994:552]. Both clients and account managers perceived the planning role as an essential resource. Moreover, account planning was observed as vital to the development of great work by bridging potential gaps in the understanding of clients and creatives. In this role account planning and account handling worked well in tandem. Ethnographic analysis confirmed that creativity was fostered amongst all agency personnel and was widely accepted as a desirable trait for anyone entering the advertising industry. Within the account handling role, the account manager exhibited signs of creative judgement and vision. Creatives in particular identified ‘good account managers’ in terms of how well they sold the product to the client. Account managers suggested that the role involved building trust, reliability and strong creative leadership. Once more, the role of presentation and interpersonal skills were recognised as invaluable characteristics for any aspiring account manager. This extended the discussion about ‘identity work’ in earlier research (Alvesson 1994:552) as here both creatives and account managers made: “astute assertions concerning the characteristics of advertising people [so that] the threats about a specific competence and identity are counteracted. Self-presentations facilitate ‘identity work’” (Alvesson 1994:552). In this study, this represented an example of “identity work” which had a role in relation to both internal (i.e. other advertising agency personnel) and external (i.e. client) audiences. As previously illustrated, Henry’s (1991) distinction between evaluative and imaginative thought highlights the different range of skills and personality types needed for the creation of outstanding advertising. The increased demands placed on agency creativity therefore reach far beyond the sphere of Art Directors and Copywriters. Account handlers are responsible for oiling the agency wheels; they liaise with clients, agency creatives, account planners and financial personnel to ensure the cohesion of the creative process. Account Managers and Account Planners must be involved in the creative process if successful campaigns are to be created. In addition, the client has to be aware of their crucial role in the process if creative excellence is to be achieved (Murphy and Maynard, 1996). Douglas (1979) believes that clients should demand a ‘shared creative perspective’ from their agencies.

28

Figure 7: Elements of the Creative Advertising Process

dapted from Wackman, Salmon and Salmon (1987, p24)

In essence, account management, the client’s own brand team, and agency ‘creatives’ should therefore share a convergent, and possibly even holistic, view of creativity within the relationship; even whilst some aspects of creativity call for divergent thinking. In effectively managing the necessary skills, the task for agency managers was found to be challenging and time consuming. In addition, the ability to apply critical judgement was seen as an important trait for top agency management. A modified version of Wackman, Salmon and Salmon’s 1987 diagram summaries the key elements identified in this study. The contribution of these factors to agency and client management understanding has been illustrated in the discussion of the tales.

Work

Product

Creative strategy

Creative execution

Media planning

Marketing strategy

Adhoc requests Long-term stability of the relationship

Work

Pattern

Creative philosophy

Authority structure

Approval process

Pseudo-debates

Deadlines and timing

Client-agency differences

Organisational

Factors

Corporate policy

Organisational structure

Organisational politics

Client-agency ethos

Role of creative leaders

Marketing strategy

Management motives

Personnel factors: competence, experience

Relationship

Factors

Rapport/comfort

Energy level

Trust/respect

Intuition vs. structure

Control patterns

Personality traits

Personnel turnover

Quality of

Communication

29

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to examine advertisers’ and agencies’ perceptions of the creative process, and to explore potential conflict arising as a result of these perceptual differences. The conceptual framework will be re-examined briefly in the light of empirical findings. Areas of further research will then be suggested in conclusion. Following Alvesson (1994) we used a conceptual figure (Figure 3 ) as a “loose contour” in order to understand “the dominant ideas within the object of study” (Alvesson 1994:557). As a tangible result of a successful agency-client partnership the creative product was seen as the core feature of the creative process. The quality of the creative product was dependent upon client and agency diligence and cooperativeness. Throughout the study, these two elements were seen to be vital to the success of the advertising process and the generation of strong creative products. The careful and persistent application of effort (i.e. diligence) in the account team was an aspect co-ordinated by the account director. In order to facilitate the creative process, account planners, media managers, creatives, production and traffic staff required a certain level of direction and motivation. The account manager’s role was consequently found to contain elements of creative vision, determination and leadership. The cooperativeness of the account team appeared to underpin the longevity, health and general well being of the account over time. Cooperativeness was shown to be the responsibility of all in the account team, but the study illustrated that the account director was the ultimate guardian of the advertising account, and thus responsible for the smooth running of the account at both strategic and tactical levels. Cooperativeness manifested itself as a key concern at two levels. First, interdepartmental co-operation was a key factor in the quality and effectiveness of the creative process. Interdepartmental management was a difficult process, managed by large advertising personalities with extensive experience of agency life. Second, the level of co-operation between agencies and their clients was a major part of the process. Agency-client co-operation was found to be determined by a host of internal and external factors, which have been analysed and discussed in this study. Within these two core factors lay a broader range of process-related attributes. First, the strategic awareness of client business needs, rather than the provision of short-term advertising solutions, was an issue of major concern to the agency. Agency personnel recognized that, although the product offering was primarily advertising, strategic marketing was an important service that larger clients took for granted. The existence of different belief systems underpinned the creative relationship. These various ‘webs of significance’ which surrounded creativity, and were enacted by different groups of personnel across the agency and client, was illustrated throughout the study to be a major source of conflict. Although the agency and client had a commonly broad view of the creative process (confirming Michell 1984), a number of differences clearly emerged in statements about creativity. Generally, agency personnel were more attached to concepts such as emotive thinking, leaps of imagination and intuitive idea generation. Client personnel, on the other hand, felt more comfortable viewing creativity as a structured process. This led to conflict in the process of creating advertising. Culture and the ethos of the relationship were found to be fundamental in the success of creative partnerships. The cultural fit between agency and client was an important consideration for selecting a long-term partner. ‘Creative promise’ and ‘theatrical performance’, were as important as strategic proposition and media planning for client companies. All respondents noted the importance of

30

interpersonal skills and the communication process in all aspects of the relationship, suggesting that these were important for all stages (cf Wackman, Salmon and Salmon 1987). Interdependence between the client and agency existed to varying degrees. There tended to be broad agreement on strategic issues, while tactical issues often caused conflict. Agency account teams invested large proportions of their time gaining approval from all those actors involved in the process. Creatives and account handlers were found to co-exist with a great deal of success. Despite this, account handlers and creatives displayed vast cultural differences in the way they approached and performed their work. Rapport and communication were vital constituents in enabling the dissemination of ideas and in the evolution of holistic thinking. Communication formed the foundation of the creative process, in terms of both its openness to new ideas and its strategic precision in defining a brief. Rapport was built as a result of close interpersonal contact and familiarity. Account managers commented that rapport gave rise to confidence in the relationship and enabled experimentation with new ideas and working practices. An example of disjuncture here would be the unhappiness of the client when the agency reorganized and reallocated agency personnel. Finally, client-agency rapport brought with it an element of trust and respect for the view of the other partner. However, the agency and its client companies had different views of what constituted ‘trust’. The agency viewed trust as a reward for consistent long-term service. Clients on the other hand, regarded trust as a reciprocal process. Some changes had occurred since the initial industry research (Michell 1984). Client companies seemed to be less concerned with ‘creativity’ per se. The emphasis for client companies had shifted from creative excellence toward strict cost-controlling measures. Halinen (1997:28) identified the emergence of cost factors and price competition in her study of agency-client relationships in the Finnish industry. Advertisers questioned the role of creativity in the advertising process due to its intangible nature. Clients were therefore found to be less concerned with the process of creation, favouring structured processes with calculable returns. In addition, clients demanded accountability from all of the resources allocated. In line with the cost-cutting attitude, media spending was carefully monitored and potential gain in real terms was carefully compared with a wide variety of other media options. Attention was increasingly focused on the effective use of media; and there are now a number of sophisticated media houses that specialise in the provision of strong strategic thinking and creative use of media. As such media has changed and is now considered to be a vital advertising function attracting high salaries and top-flight graduates; and to involve different aspects of creativity. The study supported Michell’s (1984) conclusion that creativity is a multifaceted activity and one which is carried out by agencies and clients in a variety of different roles and contexts. The study also extended this earlier research (Michell 1984) methodologically, with an ethnographically-based study to collect qualitative data. This approach provided valuable additional insights into understanding creativity as both product and service, confirming Halinen’s point (1997:234) that “reception of the creative output.. constitutes another element of the service outcome”. In addition, the empirical findings identified differences in the perception of creativity in agency-client relationships which confirmed that creativity is a continually evolving process. The findings showed that there are important cultural differences between the perceptions and expectations of the creative process within the agency-client relationship, which has potentially important implications for managers, both for client companies looking for agency partners; and for agencies seeking to retain clients (Michell 1984; Halinen 1997). Such findings have implications for the quality, and thus productivity, of agency-client relationships. The creative process should clearly not be isolated within the creative department. As the literature review illustrated, creativity is a tool that must be fully promoted throughout the agency and with its relationships with clients. Agency managers need therefore to focus on a better integration of the creative process throughout the agency. Directions for future research would include agency and client perceptions of different aspects of creativity: people, process and product, within the context of the five broader categories: the client-agency relationship; the creative ethos; creative environment; the creative process; and creative teams.

31

REFERENCES Alvesson, M. 1994. 'Talking in Organizations: Managing Identity and Impressions in an Advertising Agency', Organization Studies, Vol. 15, 4, pp.535-563. Alvesson, M. 1998. 'Gender relations and identity at work: a case study of masculinities and femininities in an advertising agency', Human Relations Vol. 51, 8 August, pp.969-1006. Alvesson, M. and J. Skoldberg, 2000. Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research, London: Sage. Arnould, E. J. and M. Wallendorf. 1994. 'Market-Oriented Ethnography: Interpretation Building and Marketing Strategy Formulation', Journal of Marketing Research XXXI, November, pp.484-504. Bantz, C. R. 1983. 'Naturalistic Research Traditions' in Communication and Organizations: An Interpretive Approach, ed. L. Putnam and M. Pacanowksy, Beverly Hills: Sage. Conklin, H. 1968. 'Ethnography' in D.L.Sills (ed.) International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 5, pp.15-208, New York: Free Press. Cook, W.A. 1996. 'Paradise tossed (creativity in advertising)', Editorial Journal of Advertising Research ,March-April Vol. 36, 2, pp.6-7. De Bono, E. 1982. Thinking Course, Pitman. De Bono, E. 1990. 'Advertising People Aren’t Creative', Advertising Age, December 3, p.30.

Douglas, R.C. 1979. 'Creativity – the clients’ view', Advertising Age June 4, pp.58-59.

Fendley, A. 1996 .Saatchi and Saatchi: The Inside Story Arcade. Goffman [add to page 3] Halinen, A. 1997. 'Relationship Marketing in Professional Services: A study of agency-client dynamics in the advertising secto', London: Routledge. Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. 1995. 'Ethnography: Principles in Practice 2nd ed., London and New York: Routledge. Handy, C. 1996. 'A columnist’s point of departure', Management Toda,y May 33. Henke, L.L. 1995. 'A longitudinal analysis of the ad agency-client relationship: predictors of an agency switch', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 35, 2, pp.24-30. Henry, J. 1991. 'Creative Management', Sage.

Hinton, G. 1997. 'Cutting can kill your creativity', Marketing Magazin, April 24, 9.

Hobson, R. F. 1985, 'Forms of Feeling', London: Routledge.

Holloway, I. 1997. 'Basic concepts for Qualitative Res', Oxford. Isaksen, S. G., & K. B. Dorval. 1993. 'Toward an improved understanding of creativity within people: The level-style distinction',. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C.

32

Mednick S.A. 1962. 'Associative basis of the creative process', Psychological Review, Vol.69, 3, pp.220-232. Murdock, R. L. Firestien, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), 'Understanding and recognizing creativity: The emergence of a discipline', Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing, pp.299-330. Kendrick, A. , Slayden D. and Broyles, S. J. 1996. 'Real Worlds and Ivory Towers: A Survey of Top Creative Directors', Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, Vol. 51, Summer, pp.63-74. Klebba, J. and Tierney, P. 1995. 'Advertising Creativity: A Review and Empirical Investigation of External Evaluation, Cognitive Style and Self-Perceptions of Creativity', Journal of Current Issues and Research in , Vol. 17, 2, Fall, pp.33-51. Kover, A. J., James, W. L. and Sonner, B. S. 1997, 'To Whom do Advertising Creatives Write? An Inferential Answer', Journal of Advertising Research, Jan/Feb pp.41-53. Michell, P.C.N. 1984. 'Accord and discord in agency-client perceptions of creativity', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 24, 5, pp.9-23. Michell, P.C.N. 1998 .Personal communication. Mondroski, M. M., Reid, L.N. and J. T. Russell 1983. 'Agency Creative Decision Making: A Decision Systems Analysis', Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 6, pp.57-69. Moriarty, S. and Vandenberg, B. G. 1984. 'Advertising Creatives Look at Creativity', The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 18, 3, pp.162-174. Parnes, S.J. 1963.'Education and creativity, Teachers College Record, 64, pp.331-339. Perkins, D. 1981. 'The Mind’s Best Work', Harvard University Press. Reid, L.N, King, K., Whitehill and D. E. DeLorme. 1998. 'Top level agency creatives look at advertising creativity then and now', Journal of Advertising. Vol. 27, 2, pp.1-14. Richards, I.A. 1936. 'The Philosophy of Rhetoric', London: Oxford University Press. Rickards, T. 1998. Personal communication. Rosen, M. 1991. 'Coming to terms with the field: Understanding and Doing Organizational Ethnography', Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 28, 1, January, pp.1-24. Sanday, P. R. 1979. 'The Ethnographic Paradigm(s)', Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 December, pp.527-538. Talbot, R. J. 1997, 'Taking style on board', Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 6, 3, pp.177-184. Tinkham, S. F, W., Lane, R. and A. Leung 1987. 'Conflict between Account and Creative Personnel within the Advertising Agency', Proceedings of the American AdAd… ? Advertising R38-42.

33

Van Maanen, J. 1979. 'The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography', Administrative Science Quarterly 24, December, pp.539-550. Van Maanen, J. 1988. 'Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography' University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. Verbeke, W. 1988. 'Developing an advertising agency-client relationship in the Netherlands', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 28, 6, December-January, pp.19-27. Wackman, D. B., Salmon, C. T. and C. C. Salmon 1987. 'Developing an agency-client relationship', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 26, 6, December- January, pp.21-28.