I recently got rather engrossed looking at the latest copy of The Drum magazine which has a special feature on the Chip Shop award winners. The Chip Shop Awards is an international creative competition with no rules. It encourages creative’s across the world to showcase their fresh, bizarre and ingenious ideas, and the best thing is that there are no limitations as the work doesn’t have to run and the client doesn’t even have to be their own!
Dave Trott, a former Chairman and judge from 2009 said “I think the purpose of The Chip Shop Awards is to take the piss. To take the piss out of how seriously advertising takes itself.” – I couldn’t agree more. Some of the winners and the entrants work is extremely funny, yet very intellectual, purely because there are no limitations. They are ideas in there purest form, with no restrictions of how creative or daring they can be.
Here are a few of my favourites and hopefully you’ll find them as inspiring and imaginative as I did. These adverts give us an insight into the imagination, thinking and inspiration of other individuals.
Best use of bad taste LYNX – father dear father by Rockfield Media
Best use of a shop window postcard space The Northface – Made for the outdoors by Archibald Ingall Stretton
Best use of shocking copy Court House Clinic – C***s by Golley Slater
Its four years since the first iPhone was released at the end of June 2007, marking a dramatic turning point in the mobile industry. Since then other phone companies have fought back and smartphones have evolved from an expensive luxury to a common tool with the market set to grow 55% this year.
The seemingly endless list of features that enable accessibility, functionality and convenience are enticing consumers to ditch their ‘talk and text’ devices and upgrade to a shiny new smartphone. Forget texting and phone calls, now we have multiple platforms to stay in contact with others. Through email, Facebook, Twitter, Video calling, live chat – the possibilities are never-ending.
The challenge for brands at the moment is about creating content which can easily be consumed across a multitude of platforms, attracting a wider audience. One particular sector that is rapidly becoming a channel that retailers can’t ignore is M-commerce, with 82% of retailers working on a mobile website and 42% developing a mobile strategy.
Customers want to buy online, they are no longer pessimistic, and in fact they themselves are looking at new ways to do so, mainly via mobile. This new trend is reflected through recent figures that show 82% of consumers want to buy products on mobile, with the online industry expected to be worth £70bn by the end of the year. Brands such as Marks & Spencer have seen a dramatic usage in their mobile website with more than 5.5m people using it in the past year.
However it’s not only purchasing that consumers want to do through mobile, they also spend time searching products, comparing prices and reading product reviews. Google have conducted a study on mobile movement to look further into how the smartphone has affected the way consumers search and shop, drastically changing the retailer and consumer relationship. Below are some of the statistics presented from their findings.
70% use a smartphone while in the store
54% use a smartphone to find a retailer
49% use a smartphone to compare prices
48% use a smartphone to get promotions and coupons
44% use a smartphone to read reviews and product info
Nevertheless despite the growing use of mobile search and purchasing by consumers, 14% of retailers say they have no plans to enter this space and 75% of retailers haven’t added mobile into existing strategies. At the rate the mobile industry is developing, now is not the time to be falling behind, those that do will have a long future of playing catch up ahead of them.
So what does the future of mobile hold?
I think we are just seeing the beginning of the mobile industry as smartphones are set to become faster, cheaper and brighter with better internet access and of course many more games. 2011 may well become the year of the mobile wallet, making mobile payments a mainstream commodity for consumers as we see a push in the mobile payment sector. If you’re not part of this you’ll risk being forgotten and once that happens it will be very hard to make a comeback in such a competitive, fast paced environment.
I think it’s safe to say that the word ‘smart’ is playing much more relevance to the word ‘phone’ in the instance of the Smartphone.
Despite an abundance of forecasts predicting a downfall in magazine print sales, brands are bouncing back with a reported increase in sales. At 64%, print is still the most important revenue generator for magazines but will this remain the case with the arrival of tablet computers?
There seemed to be a grey cloud looming over magazine brands as many feared that the internet would decline print sales. However it is becoming apparent that perhaps it is not a case of online over ruling print but instead magazines making their brand accessible through multiple mediums, understanding what their audience wants.
I think the future holds room for both print and digital with the key focus been on brands developing a range of different platforms to provide options for how audiences want to read. Print is the core feature of magazine brands but as we look to the future, the world of digital cannot go unnoticed by titles that wish to remain competitive and innovative. The power of digital provides a playground of design and development, giving the option for a simple extension of a magazine into a digital version to creating fully interactive, multi-media content.
If anything the magazine industry should see the App revolution working in their favour as it provides a captive audience and a clear revenue stream. The iPad supports rich, quality produced photos, layouts, and pop out features which is what consumer magazine publishers specialise in. GQ, Tatler and Glamour are amongst many that have already launched iPad apps, trusting it as a source of strong, continuous revenue and are already reaping the rewards through a continuous stream of downloads.
Although Crowdsourcing is not new to the creative industry, it is rapidly becoming popular with busy marketing managers. Brands are experimenting by looking further afield than their traditional agency to source ideas for new creative projects.
Is this a threat to the creative agency?
In this article I shall explore different types of Crowdsourcing and the impact it could have on traditional agencies, looking into what the future holds for both parties.
Crowdsourcing for finished work
This type of Crowdsourcing allows clients to post their creative brief online, for example logo design, web design or writing services on sites such as 99designs and CrowdSPRING and wait for a surge of ideas to be posted. They can then commission the work from the candidate. Brands such as Starbucks and LG are amongst many that have trusted CrowdSPRING and have been satisfied with the results.
Crowdsourcing for concepts and ideas
Sites such as Idea Bounty allow clients to post a brief asking for ideas which they will then use to execute themselves. This approach can produce a vast amount of ideas, and promises a fast turnaround.
Amongst many famous brands, Unilever was one to brave the move from using traditional agency Lowe, whom they’d worked with for 15 years, to seek a new print ad from the creative community for their product, Peperami. This did seem to pay off; Unilever gaining significant exposure for the brand, and global insight.
Although there seems to be an abundance of positivity from both the clients and creatives who have become part of this community, there doesn’t seem to be much consideration for where traditional agencies stand amongst all this.
New ‘Creative Exchange’ Blur Group claim not to be a freelancing platform but instead a creative services exchange that are based on optimal value, choice and creativity for corporate brands. Their strapline states that their ‘unique business model and advanced technology will radically alter the marketing services space’ – I do feel that they have been slightly ambitious with their plans to ‘disrupt the traditional agency model’ through cutting out the needless costs of a traditional agency with their ‘no frills’ approach. The need for creative agencies won’t be diminished just because Blur Group offer clients a service where creative ideas can be exchanged in an environment that provides choice and value – I think they are very naive to even think this.
The internet has an overwhelming power that allows everyone to have a voice and an opinion, which sometimes can be a dangerous thing. The risk of creating an online environment for creative individuals to share their ideas with others is that it is potentially de-valuing the creative process as a whole. The accessible nature of creative ideas enables others to steal their ideas. Furthermore, the lack of quality control amongst the Crowdsourcing community enables anyone, anywhere to upload their ideas with seemingly no restrictions or requirements to be met.
Coming from a traditional agency I would argue that although there are benefits to using Crowdsourcing for a fast turnaround and to pool creative ideas, the lack of personal communication and brand understanding is vitally absent. Deep understanding of a client’s brand values is something that allows creative professionals to develop an appropriate strategy that encapsulates the client’s brief. Without this I fail to see how Crowdsourcing creative’s can provide the strategic, long-term value clients respect.
As the growth of Crowdsourcing rises so is the resistance from traditional agencies. In their own right agencies are opposing the new shift towards Crowdsourcing as they risk losing existing accounts with clients, and, in turn, money. Some would argue that sourcing ideas through Crowdsourcing loses vital components of the brand communication process that links the strategy with the brand identity.
Perhaps traditional agencies shouldn’t see Crowdsourcing as a threat but instead a warning that they cannot become complacent in this industry. If used correctly, Crowdsourcing could be advantageous to agencies through providing a collective range of ideas for an existing client brief, almost like a visual focus group. The agency would act as quality control, selecting appropriate ideas that can be adapted further to meet the requirements of a client’s brief and brand personality. If both the agencies and their clients begin to consider using Crowdsourcing models they could add huge value to their business.
For short term projects Crowdsourcing does provide a global community of creative talent but without the high level of brand insight and understanding I don’t think it provides enough to dominate the place of traditional agencies in the creative industry. Agencies look further, conducting a deep analysis of the brief and questioning elements within it. It is easy for clients to become submersed in their own company, often developing a company orientated brief. This is where agencies provide an invaluable insight into a clients business, adding a new perspective that addresses different areas and has much more focus on the consumer and their needs.
To put it simply…
Crowdsourcing = quick fix
Traditional agency = long term strategy and value
