"More for less is something everybody expects; I don't think it can be wished away,"

Nandini Dias, national media director, Lodestar, has a clear roadmap for the agency. "I would like Lodestar to be the best in terms of output, not number No 1 in terms of size," she says. To this end, Dias makes sure that whoever joins the agency is "talented enough", has his or her "planning fundamentals in place", and, has "integrity of character" as well. "You are dealing with money day in and day out," she says. "Hence, it is important to know where the individual stacks up in terms of integrity." In charge of a team of 60, Dias was at the forefront when Lodestar was adjudged the Media Agency of the Year in 2002 and a runner-up the following year at the Emvies. In this interview to Viveat Susan Pinto of agencyfaqs!, Dias dwells on the strengths and weaknesses of the agency, reasons for keeping a low profile and plans for the future.

Edited Excerpts

More for less is something everybody expects, so I don't think it can be wished away. Having said that, I do believe that media should get more than 15 per cent as compared to the 2.5 or 3 per cent we draw now, because, we have evolved into a full-service enterprise. We no longer do just 'media'. We service the client, are accountable to him, and hence, should be compensated to the extent of at least 10 per cent, not 2.5 or 3 per cent.

Speaking about clients, you have two sets of them. One, who understands the effort you are putting in, will recognise it, thank you and reward you accordingly. The other set will attempt to reduce the cost per rating point and will go from agency to agency trying hard to bring it down, bidding on commissions as well. Such clients do not realise that they are comprising on the product or service offered, because, when compensated poorly, agencies are not able to invest in the business. Consequently, they will not be able to increase their learnings on the category and help the client.

You can't work within a framework. You have to evolve everyday to the environment of that particular day. An innovation today is passé tomorrow; which means you have to understand the client's problem and find solutions.

It is a hot idea to consider media innovations when budgets are limited because that is the best possible way to get maximum returns on investment. Let me cite an example. Fa, which is an international soap brand, was looking to set foot in the country, and, unlike competitors in the category, had limited budgets on hand. No matter what it did, there was no way it could match the activity level of players such as HLL and P&G, whose spends in the category are huge. Hence, instead of doing normal media planning, we proposed to invest their money in the Femina Miss India contest, since it was the most happening event at that point in time.

Research played a significant role in backing our decision to invest close to 70 per cent of the advertiser's budget on the property. Fa was about freshness, and so was the contest, which projected fresh, young faces. It was a global brand setting foot in India, which meant that we needed a platform that was global as well as local in nature. It was a national-level event, and so was the brand, which was looking at a nation-wide launch. And finally being a Times property it was promoted heavily by the group, which meant that Fa, the main sponsor, also got significant mileage. The idea worked so well that we continued with the strategy when the first edition of Popstars was launched too. Though Coke bagged the title sponsorship, Fa, as the associate sponsor, got more or less the same mileage. And the first group was promoted far more than the second group.

The point is unless you don't think radical when you have small budgets, I don't think you could get the best return on investment. With huge budgets, I could be present anywhere and do whatever I can for the brand. The trick is to pull it off with élan with minimum budgets on hand.

Yes, we do prefer keeping a low profile. Despite being adjudged the Media Agency of the Year in 2002 and runners-up the following year at the Emvies, we have not made a song and dance about it. We prefer concentrating on improving our standards every year than tom-toming our achievements. The client should benefit. That is the idea.

Regarding our portfolio of clients, it is amazing how we make inroads into the client's business via media. Often we have pitched and acquired the media business, and then attempted to convert it into a full-service account. The highpoint for us is not that we have acquired an AOR account, but whether there is scope to get DM, creative, PR and so on and make it a full-service account rather than restricting the operation to an individual sphere. Our objective is to move from 2.5 per cent (media-agency commission) to 15 per cent (full-service commission). And there are innumerable instances of such conversion including the Pepsi-Tropicana business, Castrol, Amul and so on. Nevertheless, we do handle AOR businesses such as Henkel and Nerolac.

Yes it is. In fact, this is the positioning we have internally as well. Lodestar will be strategy-led, creative solution providers. And this has nothing to do with knack. It is a process. Planners are trained to think out-of-the-box. To ensure this happens, we have structured ourselves differently from other agencies. We were the first to set up a centre for excellence called the Lodestar LabCenter, which does proprietary research and develops tools and techniques enabling planners to get deeper insights. Not only do big spenders, but also small and medium-sized advertisers, full-service accounts as well as AOR clients benefit from this exercise. As a result, we have outstanding work across clients rather than a select few.

That is an assumption. Just because we do not think it necessary to talk to the press every time we are invited to a pitch does not mean that we are not invited at all! Also, if an account is open for pitching, and, if we express our desire to pitch for the business, I do not think any client will deny us the opportunity. The reason being that we have such strong credentials.

We look at the category and whether it excites us or not. Size of the business, profitability are issues one has to consider when pitching. However, we never forget to focus on the category. It has to excite us.

Convergence and consolidation is a phenomenon, which is globally true. It is happening across industries. There is no reason why it will be different in our industry as well. But it is also true that the very big and the very small (read boutiques) survive. The pressure is highest on agencies who are not affiliated and not in the Top 10.

We are known for our research. In fact, at the Emvies, MEDIAGRAPHICS, our precision targeting tool, won a Gold, and IMPRESS, our press research, bagged a Silver. Every year we invest in at least, two new pieces of research, and the big differentiator is that, we continue with what we take up for the years to come. We do not do a dipstick with a small sample size in one city.

Like most other agencies affiliated to international networks, Lodestar India too, looks up to its parent for international learnings and allied research. The Power Grid, which is a method to establish what should be the benchmark for advertising in a period, was first devised by FCB. It is another story that almost every other media agency has staked its claim on the ownership of the tool, but thankfully, Scissors and Bumba, who are the authors of the most famous media planning book, have given credit to FCB.

The principles of media planning may not be very different worldwide, but customisation in terms of software and database is a must. Reading and noting studies have been done across the world, but, the noticeability of Page 3 in The Times Of India, Mumbai, can be gauged only when a study is conducted in the country. It cannot be predicted by picking up a software or database of an international market. I am told that a number of agencies claim they have international tools at hand. These are used during pitches only. In practice, they never work.

There is a definite dearth of good media talent. But I am not surprised. Media agencies hardly take the trouble to train their youngsters, so why wouldn't media managers complain? However, I would disagree that media is a drudgery. It is no longer a drudgery. If you go on a campus-recruitment drive, you will find media to be the most preferred career option. Money is a huge problem though. I know of mid-sized agencies that will pay ridiculous amounts to buy out people. I guess it is the only possible way they can encourage talented people to join them.

I hope so. But we do not dwell on the Emvies through the year in the hope of winning awards. At the end of the year, we check with our planners whether there is anything they would like to present. We have been doing this over the last two years, and fortunately, the work presented by us was better than what was put forth by other agencies.

I don't think increasing the number of entries will make that big a difference. If I believe there is something that deserves to be entered, I will put it forward. However, increasing the number of entries to fight GroupM is ridiculous. The entry has to be worthwhile and hold its ground. That is the idea.

FCB-Ulka is among the Top 5 in the country; Interface Communications is in the Top 20; plus we have AOR businesses. I think that should make the point clear. The organisation never sets targets for the media agency. The day you start setting targets to grow media you can be sure that clients will not get cutting-edge solutions. The media plan will reflect internal targets, and that is something we do not want to get into.