Piyush Pandey, group president & national creative director, O&M India, needs no introduction. Knowing this, we shall not pretend to introduce him, not even for the sake of journalistic convention. Suffice it to say that Pandey, fresh from Cannes with a brace of Gold Lions and one Silver Lion, speaks to N. Shatrujeet of agencyfaqs!, about India's performance (and future prospects) at Cannes; the mantra behind O&M's creative glory; the myth about O&M being a one-man outfit; his hopes from the younger generation… Along the way, he also identifies his 'worthy successor', and lays a few ghosts to rest.

Q. A great year for India at Cannes… perhaps an indication of our arrival on the global circuit. Judging by the work we are doing here, and the international work showcased there, do you think India has finally cracked Cannes?

A. This is actually a difficult question to answer in 'yes' or 'no' terms. I have always believed that there is a threshold that has to be crossed, after which a country is looked at a little more seriously. There is no guarantee whether we are going to win more Lions or fewer Lions in the years to come. But one thing is clear - that there is a quantity called India, has entered people's mindsets there. So Indian work will be looked forward to in the future.

To borrow from cricket history, till Sri Lanka beat the West Indies in the first match of the World Cup, no one took Sri Lanka seriously, although they used to win one match here and one match there. It was only after that World Cup win that people sat up and took notice of Sri Lanka. Indian advertising has reached that stage. People there have written that the country to watch out for is India.

But yes, we will have to still work very hard. Shoddy work will not get us anywhere. The doors at Cannes have been opened, but we will have to deliver great work to continue winning. This year's wins are not a license for India to win again and again. They don't give out freebies there. We have to earn it.

Q. Tell me, should one read much into this year's win? After all, 1996 was also a watershed, when Hexit won a Gold Lion and Ericsson won a Silver Lion, and almost everyone predicted "we'll now win regularly". That proved to be quite illusory.

A. I think it would not be wrong for us to look back at '96 and say, 'Yes, all of us got that feeling'. I personally think India has been struck with its share of bad luck, post-1996. And in my judgement - and having been to Cannes for the last eight years - there is no reason to believe why the Complan campaign didn't win a Lion. There is no reason to believe why the Fevicol 'egg' or the Fevikwik 'fish' didn't win. There is no reason to believe why the 'journey' film (for the Cancer Patients Aid Association) didn't win. Or the Times of India 'paper pusher' film. All these were worthy of Lions, in my book. Look at the number of other global awards these ads have won.

I think somewhere down the line, we, as an industry, were a bit unlucky at Cannes. If you look at our work, you can clearly see that the era of good Indian advertising had begun in the mid-nineties. The doors opened in 1996, but bad luck took over. We did great work, for sure. For me, Complan, for instance, will always be a winner.

In fact, if I look back at our work from as far back as I can remember, the work of the industry has only got better. We're seeing better work every year. And I think the younger boys are going to make it even healthier.

Q. What about the work from India that did not win this year. Do you think that with a little bit of luck, we could have ended up with more?

A. Let me see… Yes, if you look at the number of Finalists, I think we should have had more. But then, a jury is a jury. And I don't ever think there is any bias against us. You've got to take it as it comes. Honestly, I was disappointed when Fevicol and Fevikwik didn't win. I was grossly disappointed when 'journey' didn't win. But that's the way it is.

I feel bad for Burnett too, this year. I had two jury members coming up to me and telling me that the 'blind' film (for the National Association for the Blind) was a great piece of work. But what to do - luck was not on Burnett's side. That's why I kept telling you we were lucky when I spoke to you from Cannes.

Q. Cannes, Clio, the One Show… O&M appears to have figured out what works with international juries.

A. (Smiles and shakes his head.) Would you say Fevicol was made for international juries? It's just a great piece of work. Did I have an international jury in my mind when the 'Second-hand smoke' idea came to me? No. An idea came to you (the 'Second-hand smoke' idea), you shared it with your client, your client gave the go-ahead, and Rajiv Rao brought it to light.

Now if you look at O&M's work that has won, would you say they have been created for international juries? No, they are all Indian ads with Indian ideas meant for India. Of course, there is nothing wrong in knowing what international juries think, but you don't design your life according to juries. Because juries surprise you - you win silver at the Abbys for this ad ('Second-hand smoke'), and the same ad wins gold at Cannes. So which jury should I plan for? (Laughs.)

Q. Which brings me to the most obvious question. There is talk of how a lot of your advertising is aimed first at award juries, and then at consumers. Would you care to put this debate to rest once and for all?

A. How many examples can I give you? The biggest winner for us, in the past five years, has been Fevicol. Is that aimed at juries first and consumers later? There are people who catch me on the street and tell me, 'Sir, aapka Fevicol mujhe bahut pasand hai.' I come back from my visits abroad, and the customs people catch hold of me and tell me, 'Fevicol to mera favourite hai.' Are these people jury members?

I think this is a very negative way of looking at somebody else's successes. I really don't have to answer this question. The work speaks for itself. Look at the work and tell me whom it was done for. The call is yours. And as far as people are concerned, I can't shut people up, and I know it. (Laughs.)

Q. All said and done, there is tacit/grudging agreement that O&M is one hell of a creative outfit. What's the magic mantra?

A. I would say Ranjan Kapur is O&M's magic mantra. When he came in here in 1993, he was the first man to put his money on the table and openly say that we are going to grow and try and be the Number One by way of creative excellence. What more can an agency ask for from a man who says that he'll make money, but only from the product that an agency is hired for. And he put the responsibility of achieving this in my hands. And when you get such a mandate from the man who is running the agency, you had better stand up and deliver. And then it was simply a case of egging each other on, pushing ourselves to do better every time.

I think our biggest turnaround came with Cadbury. It won us every award, but was it designed for the juries? Ask Cadbury. Cadbury led us to new businesses, which, in turn, led to us pushing ourselves even harder. People talk about 'designed for juries' and such. Look at the turnaround at Onida, in terms of their market performance. Look at what happened to Kelvinator in the market. We were successful at creating marketing successes. And winning awards. And Ranjan's dream was being accomplished, so he gave us greater encouragement and responsibility. We, in turn, hired and encouraged the right people. And I guess once something becomes a way of living, it rubs off from one to the other.

Q. What I am looking for is a method in O&M's madness…

A. All agencies that are professional - and there are a lot of them in this country - have the same methods and the same rules of science when approaching advertising. However, I think, somewhere down the line, some of us were able to take a leap from the science into what we felt will stand out in the tube or in print. Into what we felt excited us. And one thing led to another…

There is no science beyond that. It would be ridiculous breaking down every piece of great work into separate bits and saying this is how creativity happens. The sure-shot way of screwing up youngsters is to write a book and say how it was done. Then, what is written becomes a code for them. Whatever any good agency has been able to achieve has no code. You can't fool youngsters by saying do these 10 steps and you'll get there. Honestly, I do not know whether I'll get my next ad proper. So who am I to say how this is done?

Here, I must add that all the great work O&M has done is because our clients put pressure on us to deliver more. They believed in our capabilities to produce outstanding work. Nothing would have been possible without that long list of clients who wanted to do something different.

Q. Now I am going to contradict myself. I said people say O&M is very creative. But there is an opinion that insists O&M's creativity is limited to a few showcase clients. That stripped of these, O&M's work is on par with the industry.

A. The day you show me a Sachin Tendulkar innings of 150 runs, all 150 made of sixes, I will answer this question. (Laughs.) Yes, his singles look the same as everybody else's, but does he hit more sixes? Does he hit more centuries? That's the entire issue. Tell me which agency in this world has all its work as part of its showcase. The leader is the one who has more high points than the rest.

I wouldn't be wrong in saying that our work, across the board, has a much higher average as compared to anybody else's. If I were to take out those two clients for whom other agencies do good work, the others would have nothing left to show.

I believe very strongly in our work. Look at the work for Grasim - it has not won any awards, but has been liked by people, is creative in its own right and effective to the core. Look at the work for Amaron. I - no, even you, for that matter - can keep naming them. So I would not agree with this baseless comment. Go through the Abby records for the last 10 years and see what all O&M has won awards for, and you'll realize that we don't win awards only for these four-five clients. We won 33 awards at the Abbys in 2000 - now I am sure I did not win them for four clients. The entry pattern and simple mathematics will ensure that one entry of mine can win only two awards, at best. Fevicol jeetega to sirf ek print mein our ek film mein. Aur doosre category mein ise enter nahin kar sakta. For me, these allegations are passing shots that people lagao now and then.

But I must also add that the industry, as a whole, has broadly been with us. And I thank the industry for cheerleading and egging me on to do better. Alyque (Padamsee) and Subhash Ghoshal were very supportive in my early years, for instance. If I start naming names, I'm afraid I might miss out on some, so I won't. All I'll say is that the industry, collectively, has been very kind to me.

Q. O&M's reputation as a creative agency has been built on the effective use of humour in advertising. Doesn't O&M run the risk of making humour an 'agency signature'?

A. If the signature is good, why not use it? If you've been able to do that for 10 years and there is no fatigue, what's the harm? I have a belief that a smile will never go out of fashion. A chap who watches television or listens to the radio or opens a magazine is not looking for a cure or a solution for his life's problems. He is in entertainment mode. Can you deliver your message to him in a manner that makes him remember you?

I have also made commercials that make you cry - in a positive way, that is. (Laughs.) I have done 'Mile sur mera tumhara' on one end. We have done the literacy programme. We have done very sensitive work for Asian Paints. Look at the 'doctor' ad for Amaron. It is a straight demonstration, done in an interesting way. Look at the work for 'Goli ke hamjoli' - emotional to the core.

I think if you were to look for a pattern, what will emerge - and actually, it is not a pattern but a belief - is that there is a conscious effort on our part to touch life somewhere, somehow. And very often, it is with a smile.

Q. You had once told me that O&M is not a one-man show. Yet, people refuse to see beyond Piyush Pandey. Isn't this a scary prospect for this agency, perception-wise?

A. First, let me say that this statement is a wonderful, safe device to go and tell clients and people that, 'Unke paas kya hai, bas ek Piyush Pandey hai.' I have said so before too, if I had to do all this work that you see, I must be Superman. The kind of work that Sagar (Mahabaleshwar) and Pushpy (Pushpinder Singh) have been doing this year… I don't even see the Orange work; two youngsters (Mahesh V. and Rajiv Rao) sitting up there do everything on Orange. What Vidur (Vohra) and Mac (Manmohan Anchan) did for Post-its, I saw after it was produced. Prasoon (Joshi) did a lot of the work from O&M while he was here. 'Goli ke hamjoli' was Prasoon's work. All the work on Yahoo! has been done by Abhijit (Awasthi). Then, in Delhi, there are Saumya (Sen) and (V.) Sunil who have done some great work. So, like I said, 'O&M is Piyush' is a good party line to demean somebody else. But I say tumhaare paas to woh ek Piyush bhi nahin hai? (Laughs.).

I am proud to say that we at O&M have some very, very good people, who have done work that I admit I wish I had done.


And one thing… If this is a one-man show, how come other agencies are hiring my able colleagues as creative directors, national creative directors and business managers? They must be pretty good, kyon? (Smiles.)

Q. So would you say that O&M has successfully 'institutionalized' creativity? More importantly, can creativity be institutionalized?

A. Creativity cannot be institutionalized. And I believe that we would be taking ourselves too seriously if we thought that we have institutionalized creativity. What we have successfully done to date - and I pray to God that we are able to do in the future - is to keep a very healthy creative environment where all members of the team appreciate, believe in and make happen work that is surprising. The environment is right, and we have to sustain it. For how long we are able to do it… (Shrugs.)

There are no formulae here. We are all players, so we win some and we lose some. But the spirit is to try and do something refreshing each time you go out to bat.

Q. Going back to the time when you were a rookie in this industry - and at O&M - what were your learnings that helped establish what is called 'the Piyush style of functioning' at O&M?

A. First of all, I think the creative environment at O&M was always there, even when I joined this place in 1982. Back then, Ranjan was the deputy-managing director, Mani (S.R.) Ayer was the managing director, and Suresh (Mullick) and Roda (Mehta) were the pillars of this organization. Even then, we had a very informal way of operating. And I guess in our growing years we learnt not to take hierarchy too seriously. I remember Ranjan would come and talk to us trainees about our problems…

However, the only thing missing was the accent on the final product. Of course, the product was always right, no doubt about that. But we were seldom brilliant. There were strokes of genius from Suresh from time to time, but there was usually a very mechanical way of going about this business. But again, the environment was always great, and I think we learnt from what was done to us to do unto others. Talking about environment, back in 1983, we were the only agency that didn't go to Levers in jackets and ties. In fact, the terminology that had been coined for us was, 'O&M is a Boy Scouts agency'; meaning, we roll up our sleeves and work, so we don't have time for stiff collars and jackets.

So, in that sense, there was nothing new that was introduced into the system. Only the aim to do better, more brilliant work. Actually, if you look at it, we were doing good work since 1988. I did 'Chal mere Luna' in '88. We did Le Sancy and the literacy ad ('Purab se surya') back then. The Asian Paints' 'pongal' ad too. All this happened before Ranjan came in. It's just that when Ranjan came in, he said he wanted more of our work to be that brilliant. And Ranjan unleashed us in a way that we didn't think about hierarchy. Otherwise, it was the same people from the pre-Ranjan days.

Q. Given your experience and the benefit of judging creative work across agencies, what is your opinion of present-day Indian creative standards?

A. The agencies here are as professional as they are internationally. Their systems and their understanding of the consumer are perhaps better than those in most parts of the world. The Indian advertising professional is at par with the best of the world, if not better.

Q. And what about the young crop of talent we have?

A. The youngsters here are mind-blowing.

I think the problem here is that opportunities are few, while talent is plenty. Why is that so? This is a very difficult country to operate in. The very fact that you are talking to so many people across so many states and communities and this and that makes you play the game with both your hands tied back. There is the 'lowest common denominator' factor that comes into play. You can't do advertising for a specific audience where you can get edgier and edgier. This curbs us a lot, and in that sense, opportunities are few. But the fact that whenever they get the opportunity they do world-class work shows talent is there.

I have a very high opinion about the youngsters of this country. The industry is buzzing with talent. It's not a surprise that today, so many of our people are operating as creative directors in different countries. Sonal (Dabral), Bobby (Pawar) and (Anil) Bathwal… Geeta Rao is now going to Bangkok as regional creative director on Dove. So many of the Trikaya boys are doing wonderfully abroad. Why do these more developed nations attract a lot of people from India? It just goes to show we have the talent.

Q. You are seen as the person most likely to take over from Ranjan. What is your gameplan for O&M in the coming years - business-wise, and creativity-wise?

A. I am making no assumptions or presumptions… But, I am quite certain that… well, Ranjan has sown the seeds, and together, we have created a culture that has been a successful model. I am loath to see anybody change it. Be it me or anybody else. We should do great work, which will get us big business, which will help us grow. There is no science to this. Halwai hai to samosa to banaayega achhi tarah. Kursiyan dekhenge, décor bhi dekhenge, but the first thing is the samosas had bloody well be the best.

Q. Let's forget management and look at the creative product alone. Where do you want to take the product?

A. Our work will always start with the consumer. It is our endeavour to convert more and more brands to do exciting work. There's a lot to be done, so that we can shut up a few people who talk about our 'five-six showcase client'. We would love to do great work on 25 clients. And the onus is on us to persuade clients to do fantastic work. We have to make them believe in great advertising. Sometimes what happens is a client tells us, 'Yaar, mujhe Fevicol jaisi ad bana do.' But when you start working on it, fear enters his heart. He appreciates great work, but when it comes to his own, he's not very sure. We have to reassure such clients, so that we do more great work on more brands, more often.

Q. One last question… Without implying that your time is over, does O&M have a worthy successor to Piyush Pandey?

A. It will always be a problem answering this question. And it has always been a problem answering this in any field or profession. We tend to believe that 'x' person is indispensable. A lot of people wondered what would happen to O&M after Mani Ayer, because Mani Ayer had been around for such a long time. But life goes on… There is enough talent here. The distance between them and me, in age, happens to be quite a bit, so it seems yeh to saare bachche hain. But the world has seen 27-year-old creative directors.

To answer your question, the obvious choice for me would be one chap who, I really hope, changes his mind and accepts my offer. In his case, the age difference between us is less, and the achievements are equal.

The worthy successor is Sonal Dabral.

I am honest enough and open enough to say that the day he is ready to move, this chair awaits him. And I am willing to take him tomorrow.

However, having said that, he is not the only option we have. Sonal might want to do other things in life. I am sure somebody will emerge - we have stars out here. We have a lot of talented people here, and each one is capable of doing the job. They just need to be entrusted with that responsibility.

August 08, 2002
Mumbai
You can write to Piyush Pandey at