The real cost of boring marketing

Finally the big brains of marketing experts, Peter Field and Adam Morgan have confirmed what those of us in agency land have known for decades - that creating dull marketing isn’t actually the ‘safe’ option; it’s the dangerous choice and will have you asking yourself, “Can I actually afford to be boring?”.

To reach this conclusion, Field and Morgan combed through the IPA Effectiveness Database (a repository of 1200 marketing case studies that examine campaign inputs such as budget, channel, strategy and creativity/originality) and mapped them against brand performance, i.e., changes to consumer attitudes and behaviour, ultimately leading to sales. In short, the database examines what marketing has actually worked.

They then categorised campaigns as either ‘dull’ or ‘not dull’ with the basic premise being that ‘dull’ campaigns were predominantly rational in nature; featuring messaging and creative that was informational through communication of facts. Contrasting this, ‘non dull’ campaigns focused on driving brand fame and shareability by generating an emotional response such as joy, sadness, intrigue…you know what emotions are.

What they found, is that a ‘dull’ campaign had to spend an additional ￡10m (~$20m NZD) to achieve the same results as a ‘not dull’ one.

Peter Field sums it up succinctly by saying, “We are not saying dull campaigns are ineffective. It is just that they do not work very hard. And you get a much bigger performance out of these more exciting campaigns – it can be six or seven times greater for every euro, dollar, or pound you put behind them.”

So for brand managers and business owners, particularly here in New Zealand where budgets are smaller than the UK, the message is clear (and irrefutable): investing in creativity and ideas that might at first seem risky, is actually the safest move you can make if you care about making your marketing dollars go further.

Quizzed on what has led to the creation of so much ‘dull’ advertising in market, Field cites ‘category norms’ as one such reason. i.e., certain categories exist where being dull has become accepted and standing out would take a very brave marketer indeed. But more alarmingly, Field references our continued preoccupation with ‘performance marketing’ (or bottom of the funnel) tactics which we know are not the way to drive maximum long term growth for brands.

So, how can your brand be less boring?

Clearly we are biased here at Plato, but investing in an agency that specialises in commercial creativity is a good place to start. Part of our strategic process is to review what is happening in the category, how the competitors are positioned as far as their brand and advertising are concerned, and understanding what the category norms are that Peter Field talks about. 

We also apply a couple of filters across the ideas we are developing to ensure they have the best chance of being something New Zealanders will like. Both of these we have lovingly ‘borrowed’ from TRA, New Zealand’s foremost research experts in understanding what ads Kiwis love.

The first is the 3R’s framework, which we have adapted to 4R’s. Analysis of New Zealand’s top ads shows that they are:

• Remarkable - they grab your attention

• Rewarding - they are entertaining or educational

• Remembered - the ad can be easily linked to the brand doing the advertising

• Repeatable - the campaign could be built on over time

The second is referencing New Zealand’s cultural codes to better understand ‘what it means to be a Kiwi today’ and hopefully create communications that play into this. For reference they are:

• Individuality

• Earned success

• Social equivalence

• Outward world view

• Connection to nature 

• Humour

The Kiwi Codes are nuanced so please go check out TRA for more in depth information.

If after reading this you are now indeed thinking, “I CAN’T afford to be boring”, get in touch and let’s find a way to make your marketing some of the best performing in New Zealand.