The major problem with award shows is that they worship the wrong god – creativity rather than effectiveness. David Burn over at AdPulp suggests that the Effies do award effectiveness. And you would think that an award show based upon effectiveness would award the most effective campaigns, right? Well, I guess it depends upon your definition of effectiveness. I agree with David that the Effies are suppose to award effectiveness but in reality they don’t. Why? Three reasons.
First. The award criteria is ambiguous and values the wrong things. Only 30% of the award criteria is based upon proof of results. Creativity, media and backgrounding share the other 70%. So even though your campaign doubles market share and dislodges the industry leader it’s still only worth 30% of your "grade". Meaning you get graded down for "style" points. I took a random look at three "Effie" case studies from JWT New York (Diamond Trading Company), BBDO New York (Vanilla Pepsi) and Arnold (Volkswagen). All three campaigns accomplished modest gains. But award winning? Do these efforts really indicate the best of the best when it comes to effectiveness? I hope not. I think not.
Second. Most clients will not allow their agencies to enter the really effective campaigns. Why? Savvy CEO’s and marketing mangers do not want to tip competition to strategy, tactics and results. Yes, I know the Effies allow for results to be kept confidential. But if your campaign is truly effective, meaning it’s generating real measurable benefits like increases in sales, share and margin, then the last thing you want is your marketing manager or ad agency broadcasting your strategy and tactics to your competition or their agency personnel who may be judging the contest.
Third, if you look at who judges the Effies, the list is a who’s who of Madison Ave., and their client counterparts. This is a group heavily-vested in worshiping the god of creativity and maintaining the status quo. If the Effie folks wanted to run a real competition and award actual effectiveness, then bring in a panel of privately-held enterprise CEO’s who OK the budgets, sign the checks and live and die with the results. They understand effectiveness.
But most importantly, if you’re selecting an ad agency based upon how many awards they’ve won then you’re using the wrong approach. What’s the right approach? One-to-one meetings, where you can determine the potential effectiveness of the agency, based upon their knowledge of your issues, and the actual experience they’ve had addressing these issues. It is in this private, one-to-one setting where it is entirely appropriate for agencies (with client approval) to discuss case studies or results of prior campaigns.
Smock’s Rule of Thumb: Generally speaking an agency’s potential effectiveness (their ability to generate sales, margin, share) is inversely related to how many creative awards they’ve won.
More on Effectiveness:
Being Reasonable: What Does it Mean for an Ad Agency to be "Hot," Anyway
AdPulp: Smock v. Fenske: Front Row Tix Still Available
Maneuver Marketing Communique: Marketer of the Year…
Learn how to wage and win battles for market share. Download the free PDF preview of the Art of Attack. Just click to get the PDF. There are no forms to fill out, you don’t need to leave your email
address. No annoying questions to answer. Just click and get your PDF.