Despite its title [Then We Set His Hair on Fire – a
reference to an accident that occurred on the set while shooting a Pepsi ad
featuring Michael Jackson], this book is not advertising industry war stories
but a paean to insight as the driving force behind all great advertising – and
I would add, all great social marketing. Phil Dusenberry distinguishes early on between ideas ['valuable though
they may be, are a dime-a-dozen in business'] and insights ['states a truth
that alters how you see the world’]. To
paraphrase him, a good idea may inspire a great tactic, but a good insight can
power a program. Some of my former staff
(and a few clients) may recall my interest in centipedes – those insights that
suggest a thousand ideas or tactics.
Here’s how we developed the creative brief and what follows is the insight
that emerged from that process for the National Cancer Institute’s 5 A Day
Media Campaign:
Lack of top-of-mind awareness, physical invisibility, and
perceived amount of effort and time posed obstacles to the target’s very
positive intentions and preferences for fruits and vegetables over faster, less
nutritious foods. The target audience was very much driven by a perceived scarcity
of time. The team set the following action: Add two servings of fruits and vegetables 'the easy way
instead of the hard way.'
Now the power of this insight isn’t that it is worthy of a
Nobel Prize, it is what is suggests or implicates as the actions to pursue in
all of our marketing and communication efforts. With 5 A Day, it was no longer about ‘eat your five servings of fruits
and vegetables a day,' a message that we already knew was DOA with our target
audience. Instead, our insight led us to
focus on ‘adding two in easy ways’ that immediately prompted attention (the
audience did have laudable aspirations to want to eat more healthy), provided
suggested actions in a context that were relevant for the audience (making it tangible and
easy), and were ‘achievable’ – or as the behavioral change theorist might put
it, they had a high degree of confidence (or self-efficacy) that they could do
what was suggested to them.
Phil is, as a creative director, an eager consumer
of audience research – as are most good CDs I’ve known. The problem is what kind of research they’re
looking for. As you might have guessed,
it doesn’t involve a single mean, median or mode.
…the only research that matters to me (and to most creative
people) is the research that inspires ideas and leads to insights. And the research that consistently delivers
insights is the research that lets consumers air out their problems.
It is along this theme, that most audience research is too
contrived, focused on the wrong questions, overly choreographed and dispassionately analyzed that Jon, Phil and I agree. I have literally had clients look over the
table at me, say ‘I know we shouldn’t do this, but…' and then proceed to tally
the responses to questions in a focus group – embracing those comfortable
means, modes and medians instead of panning for the nuggets of truth and insight that come out of the mouths of the audience. Insight means
getting closer to your audience; developing an empathy with them and not hiding behind numbers. As a professional photographer counsels
people in taking better pictures: First thing, GET CLOSER!
…so much of what poses for research is little more than
people seeking information that confirms their biases, their goals, their
inclinations, and their decisions. It
has nothing to do with acquiring new information. In a sense this is another form of
‘satisfaction research’; it only tells you what you’re doing right. This is not how great insights
materialize. Insights come from owning
up to what you’re doing wrong and addressing those problems in ways that
matter.
There are many other insights and stories in this book that
make it worthwhile. Let’s leave with his
‘criteria for work that wouldn’t get out the door,' or what I suggest program planners
use as their 'program plans that won’t leave this office.'
- It’s dull, boring and unexciting (it doesn’t answer for the
audience the ‘why should I pay attention or care’ question).
- It’s not differentiating (how does the behavior stand out
from what they already do or have been told before to do?).
- It sounds, feels, or looks familiar (where’s the originality
that will break through both the clutter and their filters?).
- It’s off strategy (how does it relate to the insight?).
- It’s reaching too hard (it’s not relevant to the audience’s
daily life).
- It’s too expensive to do (yes, even the ad agencies think
about it!).
- It’s offensive, tasteless (add your own political
correctness templates).
- It’s not just a joke (“That’s a one-trick pony – a good idea for one
spot but minus the legs to survive as a three year campaign.” Being engaging and entertaining and being
funny are not necessarily the same thing – just ask your local gamer).
- It’s poorly executed (the tactics are just not well thought
out).
The most dangerous work of all, though, is … the one that
meets all my criteria. It’s dangerous
because all those superior attributes might mask the fact that you are opting
for cleverness at the expense of human connection.
Technorati Tags:
Audience Research, Health Communication, 5 A Day, Social Marketing
The answer came out pretty quickly: if they go together in the audience's mind. Pancakes without Aunt Jemima's syrup. Eating well and being more active gives me more energy. A day without orange juice... Cookies without the milk.
For people who are trying to prevent the development of osteoporosis, especially by encouraging young girls and tweens to both consume more calcium and engage in more weight-bearing physical activity, the latest news may seem like an answer to prayers.
