Ravi Balakrishnan
Advertising

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet

The classic debate on the creative work that wins and work that works

Anyone attempting to draw a co-relation between 'work that works' and 'work that wins' in print is setting himself up for a frustrating experience. It's no secret that there exists a profound gulf between award winning work and everyday ads- it's just that the gulf has widened considerably. The difference has everything to do with the way the two are designed and conceived of. Several industry leaders, including a few who've been on just about every award jury that counts weigh in with their thoughts.

R Balakrishnan, Chairman and NCD, Lowe Lintas

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
The reason (that work that works doesn't look like work that wins) has got to do with the foolishness of the award committee. It's a misuse of the print medium to satisfy an award show.

While designing work that works you have to understand the role of print. It should say something that TV can't and must say it clearly. It's much more difficult to hold interest. Clients like Levers have a design template. It's not something stupid like 'there must be a blue border', but more on the kind of personality the brand should have.

Work that wins has not resulted in anybody pushing boundaries. If you want to push boundaries, do it on things being released. People quote two or three examples but it happens very rarely.

KV Sridhar (pops), National Creative Director, Leo Burnett

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
You can do a sale ad for a Sony flatscreen TV by having a '50 per cent off' sticker attached to the TV with a paper clip, with no logo, brand or anything else. That would appeal to an award jury. Or you could do the same ad with the same proposition and visual but include the brand name, a product description, a dealer list and specifications for it to be work that works.

One of the reasons why they look so different is because the role of print has changed. With many advertisers moving to TV even for product launches, print serves the purpose of informing the consumer or to communicate promotions.

Santosh Padhi, CCO and Chairman, Taproot India

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
Judges today have stopped awarding 'the fastest, tallest, strongest' sort of creativity. Another factor which the jury considers is how well you tell your story and how well it's been crafted. Whether for awards or day-to-day communication, the lesser the elements the better. If you get these four things right, it's a clear winner; even with three out of four you'll be home. People work more on print ads but aren't bothered to maintain the quality. In most cases client guidelines restrict creativity. Something that's right for the US or the UK may not be appropriate for India.

We owe our creative standards to pushing 'work that wins'. This was started by a few people over a decade back (I don't need to name the agency), and they did it well. Though, they were criticised but they managed to make it part of the system. Had they not started this, their work wouldn't have got the appreciation it is getting now. It pays in the long run. Happydent, Fevicol and Times of India are some brands that have been applauded by the juries and consumers as well. We need more of these.

Bobby Pawar, CCO, Mudra Group

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
Producing a piece of work that catches the attention of the jury is a lot like being a weightlifter. Many times the idea that wins gold is the same as that which gets just a merit. The difference is in craft. The discipline of design is not just in design itself but in looking at each element of the communication. You look at the picture, the colour, do the words give away too much or too little and try to find the balance on which the ad rests. The greater the balance, the more award worthy the ad.

But this should be applicable both for every day work and work that wins. People don't see the thought, they see the execution, and better execution will always stop and engage more people. Sometimes - especially in print – too little time is given for craft. You do it and the ad runs four days later. I just don't understand why people put Rs five crores on an ad where they haven't crossed the 't's and dotted the 'i's.

When it comes to work that works, it has to be tasteful and fit the personality of the brand. You have to know what the objective of communication is and what you want the consumer to feel. You have to do everything with an intent and purpose, and if it doesn't serve the purpose it shouldn't be there.

Ravi Deshpande, Chairman and CCO, Contract Advertising

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
Work that wins has gone into a space of obscurity. And juries direct their minds to that kind of craft to the extent that anything else seems a little bland and unexciting.

But mainstream advertising in print and outdoor is where the opportunity lies. Until the 1990s, that was the space that occupied real creative advertising - designed to work as well as being attractive enough to win. Work that wins acts as a catalyst only if it is mainstream.

Today, people are taking short cuts on the mainstream work. It's almost like putting the brief in an ad. My mandate is that print work meant for large scale better be very creative inasmuch as it has to be effective. We've started to clean up the act and are going back to the wonderful charming work we produced in the 1990s that was always winning. I hope I am able to substantiate my statement with some sparkling print work in the years to come.

Bhupal Ramnathkar, Founder, Umbrella

<span class="htext1">Special:</span> Seldom shall the twain meet
Most created-for-awards-only work starts with an idea (and not a brief). Then the writer/art director retro-fits it to a client/brand/brief. For example, 'Hey, I have a great idea for a fitness centre. Come let's find one!'

As a jury member you are walking along, looking at hundreds of pieces of work. You hardly have time to sit back and savour an ad. Obviously then, the most minimalist work captures your attention: essentially, an ad with one dominating element. For example, if I have gone through a whole lot of ads for shoes, all of them using brilliant photography, then the one ad or campaign that uses great illustration is bound to stop the jury in its tracks.

Everyone has a point of view on regular work – from the guy who wrote the brief, to the AE, to the AD, to the VP, to the agency head or the chairman. Ditto for the hierarchy in the client's office. Plus there is research. A piece of regular work has to cater to all these points of views and make everyone happy. A created-for-awards ad has a target audience of one – the NCD.

If you compare created-for-awards work on real clients to real work on these clients, you will find hardly any similarity except for the small logo in the awards work! The formula for creative people goes something like this: Win awards. Get famous. Get to the top of the heap in the agency. Once that happens, they settle down to doing 'regular' work. Agencies hire creative hot shots for their reputation, to improve their award tally but once they are in, the hot shots who can handle regular work are valued more!

That way awards are also the currency that agency heads use to further their careers because in the scheme of evaluations, most networks have awards as a criterion.

Have news to share? Write to us atnewsteam@afaqs.com