An on-going blog to create debate and perhaps raise some awkward questions on the seven subjects discussed in Jon Steel’s video.
Topic 3. An account planner should be judged on the quality of the creative work.
Does this mean the account planners behind less than brilliant creative work should be damned? Or should they be sympathized with and encouraged to try harder and do better?
Michael Harvey, my old boss at FCB London, once told me, “The best planners can sometimes bail out second-rate creative teams, and the best creative teams will always bail out second-rate planners. So if you’re a great planner, always try to work with the best creative teams.”
Still sounds about right, but what if you don’t have much choice as to which creative team you get to work with?
Of course you could simply refuse to work with second-rate teams and be branded as an arrogant, unhelpful prima donna. Or you could pound the streets waiting for an opportunity to work at a creative hot shop, where they supposedly don’t have second rate creative teams. Not always practical.
The issue of account planners being judged on the quality of the creative work also raises its head in advertising effectiveness awards on both sides of the Atlantic with first-hand experience being a judge at The Effies in New York and a reliable report from the IPA effectiveness awards in London: superior creative work was deliberately given more weight than superior strategic thinking.
So to Jon’s way of thinking, that’s the right thing to do. But isn’t that a tad unfair to the planners?
Tell me if you think I’m wrong!