It was titled ‘A video appeal to Cannes Lions Jury members’. The first time I saw it was in the midst of my jury duties at Kyoorius D&AD awards. We were a bunch of 10 creative directors who took a break from our judging to watch this hilarious video. What’s really funny is that every one of us loved it. And knew that it was true. And none of us was going to do anything to change this reality.
For a brief moment I am sure, it did cross the minds of most creative directors how they wished their agency had created that video so they could enter it for the awards. That’s how deep the rot runs. Most creative directors who have been on juries will resonate with this line: “That’s a good entry for effectiveness, not for creative awards”. That to me sums up the game of awards. In our heads we have drawn this line between creativity and effectiveness. I am aware that a whole bunch of people will defend that with the argument that sometimes a very mediocre creative product also is very effective. I agree, but isn’t that the battle to be fought, where we create work that creatively solves a business problem?
But then we are an industry where we have seen careers that have been built on the back of awards. So what if the work was obscure, created just to win at awards and to be forgotten later? But then we have our resident experts who are encyclopedias of every obscure ad that has been done on this planet and with great pride they say, “That was done by an obscure agency in New Zealand in 1983.” And these are the sorts that become the go-to people during award season. They are kind souls who will help you out with suggestions on which other client you can approach when a definite gold (according to the creative team) has been rejected by one. They will also help you out with the forms and the categories you could enter it in. And the new kid in town – case studies. This is the sort of unreal obsession with awards. The networks don’t help either. They tacitly encourage this game with the carrot that winning at international awards and making it big in the Gunn report leads to invitations to global pitches. Really? That’s how much it takes? Here I would like to quote Sir John Hegarty, “If you focus on scam—which a lot of agencies do in Asia—you’ll always lack proof that creative work actually works.” Shouldn’t we as an industry learn from the greats in our business? This wisdom is lying in wait as we scamper along to chase awards at any cost.
Winning a Lion cannot and should not be the only motive in life. But a lot of creative directors find themselves in another loop. As soon as they realise the shallowness of this game and want to check out, they have another reality to face. They are generously reminded about how they had their time in the sun and enjoyed all the glory and are now behaving holier than thou.
In a scenario where the advertising business has so many challenges to navigate, my honest submission would be to drop this complication. Do real big work on big brands and let winning at awards be a bonus. Rather than the other way around. But then there is a counter argument to that as well—the fact that there are campaigns which were done proactively and the client went on to spend and make it big after it won accolades at the award shows. But those you can count on your fingers and there has not been one from India yet.
And as this debate carries on, we have agencies furiously filling up forms for Cannes Lions and hoping that they get a deadline extension. And I patiently wait for the day when a campaign that won the hearts of India wins the hearts of juries.
By Arun Iyer
The author is national creative director, Lowe Lintas and Partners
