• On UrbanBaby: Is it OK to breastfeed in public?
August 4, 2008 11:36 AM PDT

Dog eat dog food: Why the corporate marketing of creative firms is so often so mediocre

by Tim Leberecht
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 2 comments
(Credit: Aquarium Guys)

"We're doing all the things we tell our clients not to do," admits a strategy director at a renowned design and innovation firm, "it is ironic." He's not alone with his assessment. Other employees of creative firms (let's just use this label as a catch-all for all design, innovation, marketing, brand, and advertising firms) secretly confess that while they go out preaching to their clients about the importance of open innovation, brand consistency, or a distinct, provocative marketing messages, it is the very absence of all of which that often severely hampers their own organizations.

All too often, creative firms struggle with applying their proven principles, methodologies, and tools at home. While they strive to inject "out-of-the-box" thinking into their clients' organizations, they choose to stay within their own box, which is often in a poor condition. While they teach clients ways to foster a high-commitment, high-performance culture, they fail to create it for their own teams. While they promote flat hierarchies to spur innovation, risk-taking, and creativity, they often have bloated structures themselves that resemble the org chart of the Roman Empire. While they evangelize original and irreverent thinking, their own marketing campaigns are safe, mediocre, boring, and devoid of any potentially polarizing, sticky ideas. While they propagate the value of an engaging, user-friendly experience across all brand touch points, the interactions with their own brand are often stale and impersonal.

Of all firms, creative firms should get it right -- but they often don't. Why is that?

First of all, creative firms tend to suffer from a Not-Invented-Here syndrome. Instead of welcoming outside innovation, they succumb to the same short-sighted inward fixation that handicaps many of their clients -- relying on internal, often billable resources that are strapped for time and laden with political baggage and thus often fail to generate truly fresh ideas. Groupthink and other well-researched social dynamics prohibit true, disruptive change. Decisions are made by committees, and the result is, in many cases, the lowest common denominator. Everyone's satisfied -- but no one is really happy, let alone excited.

Another frequent phenomenon is the creative paralysis that begets the creative firm not in spite but because of its amassed creative powers. One key leader empowered to make decisions is of the essence in such environments, and the lack thereof stifles commitment. When there are too many cooks in the kitchen, too many strong creative opinions, too much foil and mutual out-smarting, competitiveness does not fuel, but rather stalls progress. Projects derail, and egos are inconsolably hurt along the way.

The third problem is the time horizon. Many creative firms' perspective is rather short-term as they are strongly exposed to the volatility of the economy and focus on new and opportunistic business rather than long-term strategic planning. The need to meet the numbers and maximize the utilization of resources all the way down to the bottom line doesn't leave much room for brand-building, a critical examination of one's own market positioning, or an overhaul of the marketing platform.

Fourth, marketers who are tasked with marketing a creative firm are under constant scrutiny for a possible lack of proper credentials. Creative teams are often skeptical about the efforts of an "outsider" who has not lived through the inner-workings and experienced the pain of working for demanding clients. Their motto seems to be: "We could do it better if only we could (but we lack the time)." Of course, the billable, creative types will never be pleased, no matter what. If the corporate marketer delivers below-par work, they will tear it apart. If s/he excels, they will feel threatened.

Creative firms can be narcissistic, navel-gazing, and soul-searching monsters, carried away with their own grandeur and prowess (or the assumption thereof) and in stubborn defiance of what their audiences have to say. And often, some nebulous self-cult makes them openly refuse being marketed at all ("The first rule of the Fight Club: You don't talk about the Fight Club.").

Marketing a creative firm is a tough job. You gotta be creative.

Here are three principles that I try to apply in my job:

1. Whenever you can, simplify. Because that's your job and the one turf where no one else can (and wants to) compete with you! Translate the complexity of your business into digestible chunks for your audience. Earn a reputation as "simplifier" and you will earn respect.

2. Stay out of the arena. Leave the intellectual strong-arming to the creative stars. Don't try to out-smart, out-wit, or out-innovate them. Drop your ego at the door.

3. Play with your own toys, find your own buddies, and build something that you and your team can truly own.

(to be continued)

Tim Leberecht is Frog Design's of vice president of marketing and communications. He has worked in the media, entertainment, and high-tech industries. Most recently, he was the head of corporate communications at Mindjet, a provider of mind-mapping software for the enterprise. Prior to Mindjet, he served as a press chief for the Athens 2004 International Olympic Torch Relay and in marketing communications for Deutsche Telekom in Germany. Tim runs the iPlot blog, and has published and spoken about branding, organizational communication, social media, and attention economics. Tim is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.
Recent posts from Matter/Anti-Matter
The psychology of healthcare reform
Mad Men finale: So you like being in advertising after all?
The world's first crowdsourced creative agency
Forrester: Adaptive branding and the new four P's of marketing
California artist rebuilds world economy with antimatter
Lessons for Nook from Zune
Social media count shows how active the social web is
Berlin Twitter Wall lets you write on history
Add a Comment (Log in or register)
by chrisbrogan August 4, 2008 1:02 PM PDT
Funny timing. I just launched ProjectDogfood.com to try and help my company build in social elements to our existing platforms, seeing as we're preaching that to others.

We did the weird approach of asking people what they wanted first. Weird, eh?
Reply to this comment
by Tim Leberecht August 4, 2008 1:53 PM PDT
Very weird!
Reply to this comment
advertisement

13 games for newer iPhones

So you've got an old iPhone or iPod and want to see what some of the latest games are doing with the newer hardware? We've checked out 11 titles to show you the differences.
• Images: Old vs. new

Intel to pay AMD $1.25B in settlement

Antitrust and intellectual property fights come to an end for now. AMD will drop pending litigation, and Intel will "abide by" a long list of prohibitions.
• AMD: Our claims are 'ratified'

About Matter/Anti-Matter

Tim Leberecht and Adam Richardson both work for Frog Design, a consulting firm specialized in designing innovative products and services for Fortune 500 clients. On the Matter / Anti-Matter blog, they engage in a debate around questions they face day-to-day in their work, using convergence/divergence as a lens through which to look at the pressing issues in business, culture, and technology. What makes a successful convergent product or a successful divergent innovation? Is convergence a myth that users don't really care about, or is the current state of convergence just not satisfying enough for them to embrace? How much divergence of innovation is good, and when does it just become confusing? How do you stay on top of people's ever changing needs and wants?

They are members of the CNET Blog Network and are not employees of CNET.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Matter/Anti-Matter topics

advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right