An answer for Adam: What’s the future for creatives?

of course we are all creative. so yes, no matter what your job description you are capable of generating ideas.

the problem is (and this is why ed de bono got so rich selling books on this very topic) is that most people have their innate creativity beaten out of them at school and in the workforce.

the end result is that, while theoretically capable of creativity, most people just can’t do it, because they’ve allowed themselves to get out of practice over many years. And some people, for whatever reason, are deeply unimaginative. I can dream up all kinds of crazy stuff, I can write well, I can work to a brief. But I can’t play chess to save myself. I know the rules, but my mind isn’t wired that way. We are all different.

Adam, the real difference between an agency creative (at least the good ones) and others, is that the ‘creative’ can deliver to the brief, every day of the week, without fail. Time and time again. A suit or a planner or the finance guys can fluke a cracking idea every now and again, but don’t have the ability to consistently deliver.

That is a skill that takes time to master.

And the reason why we need ‘creatives’ and not a plethora of specialists, is that our agencies just aren’t big enough to justify not having generalists as the mainstay of our departments. A 500-1000 person agency would be different, but even our ‘large’ agencies here are quite small businesses really.

You’re right that Creatives are people who solve briefs. And in theory those people and the ‘idea’ can come from anywhere.
But in joining an agency a ‘creative’ has already gone through a competitive culling system whether it’s university/awardschool/creating a book. It’s a natural quality control.They are hired based on merit, on a tangible body of work – something hardly any other job interview has the benefit of.
They are then put in a day to day to day situation where they are tested and will be show up as either good at creating ideas or not. It’s all very very tangible (unlike say strategy where being good at talking can get you a long way).
If you’ve ever sat in a meeting with a bunch or regular people, clients, or other specialists not used to coming up with ideas you will know that nine times out of ten their ideas will tend towards the cliched done-before or obvious. Not to say they couldn’t come up with genius but it’s less likely, or more accurately, less consistent. If you have to take a bet on someone (and you do) go for the ‘creative’ every time.

Some people, like yourself Adam, can utilise both sides of the brain and communicate business and branding realities internally and/or externally in addition to ideation and engagement building, and is this doubled-up savvy and output that what will soon come to be known as “creative”.

The role of being an ‘on-brief idea generator’ is not enough on its own, that’s for sure, hence the rise to prominence of the Creative Strategist that’s going to happen.

The promotion to “ECD” in my view indicates a person is certainly a creative strategist.

However, there are a number of equally talented people in their early teens who can and should be inducted early, so that they hit their creative strategy straps in their twenties, not their fifties when neurons are less and the nights too short …

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. Two things keep popping into my brain when I do:

1. Time & space: Regardless of the level of ‘creativity’ held by the person in question, having someone who is given the time and space away from the day to day running of the business to approach the brief with some sort of objectivity, and ability to connect the dots between consumer problems across categories/briefs, seems to be valuable. So regardless of the person, the structure might be right.

2. Cultural misfit: Most creatives consider themselves outsiders, or cultural misfits within the corporate world (perhaps evidenced by comments above). This may be something that’s self-reinforced by the clothes they wear, industry speak, rejection of their ideas, etc. True or not, this means they think of themselves as cultural observers. When I think of all the people I know that are “good” at coming up with ideas, regardless of agency/company type or job title, they all have some element of this thinking.

An excellent question, these days ‘ideas’ seem to come from every Tom Dick and Harry media company/ digital start up, and even from the agency strategists. Which means people question the role of traditional creatives.

But the ‘ideas’ that are created from these sources are generally of the “hey what if we created a day where everyone wears funny pants to work” or what if we gave away a free this with every that”. Or “Let’s get that famous person and ask them to curate our content.”

They aren’t really ideas. they’re well trodden promotional, sponsorship or experiential methods. Anyone who has sat through a brainstorm involving a room full of suits, planners, clients and whoever happened to pop their head into the meeting will have been in this world of pain, and it is the same every time.

And if they actually try to write ads they veer into the cliched, first thoughts that creatives have been trained to work through.

With very few exceptions, the ideas that people talk about around the world come from the heads of people who are paid to have ideas, not write briefs or strategy. Show me a non creative who can come up with an OId spice ad, a dumb ways to die, a nike powerband or a Lynxjet, otherwise accept that some people are good at coming up with ideas/ads that work and others aren’t.

You say that in the world of film and TV there is not a ‘creative’.

It’s actually very similar to advertising. The writer is the creative. The producer is the account man. The director is the director. No planner though…

Of course anyone can have ideas. Anyone can do anything, with a bit of training. For example, the finance guys could probably come up with ideas, and the creatives could probably do some spreadsheets. But would that make sense? No, it wouldn’t.

I don’t see why everyone has such a downer on simply asking people to do what they’re naturally good at it, and have years of training in.

It’s just fashionable I suppose.

I think everyone wants to have ideas, and likes to say that creatives aren’t really necessary, because they simply want to do it themselves, because it’s more fun and possibly higher status than being a suit or whatever. But, with rare exceptions, they’re not able to.

Please let’s put a stop to this carping about how creatives spend so much time playing ping pong, video games, mucking about on the internet, etc. The link between creativity and playfulness has been well established for years now, and scientifically validated. Creative minds are playful minds. We give table tennis tables to the creatives for the same reason that we give Microsoft Exel to the finance dept.

@ahem; you’re right, however if you start from creative, you get a different answer, ie “Show me a genuine creative who can interpret data, recall and apply psychology, hone in on research that matters and knock up a channel plan.” and the answer is that now there are more and more. It’s a faster and more accurate filter when one person or more individuals on a team are dual-engined.

Whatever the case I’m hoping for change as we need to get a good handle whatever it is that makes the majority of creative in Australia suck so incredibly muchly.

@About Film; that’s true! perhaps the Producer is also a bit of a planner.

While we’re on the topic of film creative, does anyone know how/why the worst film of the lot won Tropfest 2013?

There is the topic of Sound Judgment of Creative that needs to bubble up to the surface, and sadly the solution comes from having a much larger population…

Perhaps there is a role for the creative and the creative director to be the leader of all things creative, and that they have special ideas (powers) the rest of us don’t. I don’t know.

Hopefully they can spell — or is that being too creative, cheers Charles

@ Adam Smith – the problem is most don’t have the humility to accept there are plenty of people with natural talent, yet no training (and who chose not to pursue the title ‘creative’ as if it somehow certifies them as such), however throw up ideas that may be worth pursuing.

An ex-collegue of mine is now one of Australia’s most respected artists – who worked as a suit for 15 years. I never once heard him criticise the quality of work any art director put forward, yet it’s screamingly obvious now that he could of…had he not shown some humility and respect for what others do.

My point? Just because you choose a creative career, does not mean those who don’t, can’t. Nor deserve a voice.

I believe and will go to my grave believing creativity is something your born with and cannot be taught, we see the world through a different lens that when explained others find hard to see. To Adam Smiths point I don’t want to understand how you do your numbers and to be honest I’d never really get it, so why are you trying to paint this picture?

@ bob rabbit

I don’t doubt your story. It’s pretty rare though, right? For every suit who genuinely could have been a creative, there are 150 who couldn’t… but who think they could.

I think you’re diagnosing the problem in reverse. There simply aren’t hundreds of ideas-filled suits and planners out there, who “don’t have a voice” because they don’t have the title ‘creative’. They have a voice! They’re constantly voicing.

And sometimes they get their ideas through, which is great. I don’t have a problem with suits or planners coming up with ideas, at all. The more the better.

I mean, defenders sometimes score goals, and that’s great, and highly valuable.

What I have a problem with is people who say “everyone can score goals, and if we’re going to operate as a real team then everyone should be able to defend goals too. So let’s put the strong but uncoordinated defender up front if he wants to go there, and make the 5’7″ striker defend corners.”

Er, no. Let’s not do that.

Here’s an example of a recent ‘idea’ by a strategic agency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAT-msmg9OU&feature=youtube

Some additional considerations come to my mind, reading your lines Adam, and the above comments:
– does the current model really allow (and will allow) the idea to come from everywhere?
– are questions around the future of creatives raised because of the increasing importance of data?

To Jim’s point, a creative has this observer ‘status’ and misfit ‘label’ but a creative has now, more than ever, a responsibility to analyse and justify the idea which might not be in his or her traditional comfort zone.

Re-thinking the role of creative and the way we collaborate is inherent to the changes happening in the industry and the whole conversation around content – and I think it is actually for the best.

@AC

Look at the calibre of people running the creative departments in the good shops in Australia. They aren’t the reason the majority of work sucks. It’s due to ideas getting watered down by too many cooks in the agency kitchen, and weak clients who want a safe solution that doesn’t rock the boat, but that’s another can of worms innit.

I would actually counter the idea that creatives ‘come up with ideas that solve briefs’. In my experience, the number of creatives who can fully appreciate the complexities of client business problems and how to articulate a solution is actually pretty small. They exist, but they’re rare. Good looking or expensive or award winning ads are not in themselves ‘solutions’. Solutions are the end result of a strategy. A good strategist (and there’s not many of them either) can write a nice, tight brief that keeps creatives on track so the work that comes back delivers to the overall comms strategy, thus adding a piece of the puzzle that leads to the ‘solution’. A good creative brief allows freedom of creativity, but always brings it back to something that will drive commercial success for the client.

Yes we are all creative & we can all contribute. But not everyone can take all that creative input, refine, then distil it into something that conveys value and meaning for a client. Your 16 old niece can create an ad or a website or by now an app but will it solve the client’s problem in an exciting and noticeable manner? I like when everyone from accounts to developers are involved to get the ideas flowing and they are good to bounce things against during the process but people who care about ideas and want them to soar really can’t be taken out of the process because they’re the ones who polish these turds into shiny BS

@ Adam – yep, agree.

My problem is genuinely talented ‘creatives’ make-up perhaps 10% of the roles. The rest are trained creatives. It’s those, more often than not, who lack humility and operate with arrogance. And its those, who to be fair, could be matched by most suits had they the training or inclination.

I’m not disagreeing.

@ahem: I have looked at them, and you are right indeed that’s a big part of it, something I failed to mention. Impatience (aspirational krispy kreme style ‘I want it right now’ mentality) is also a big douche virus infecting clients.

Also an effect of too small a population I think is the over-cliquey-ness that infects the ad industry, which to be fair I’m sure a lot of (good) creatives would do away with if they could.

Rather sadly, clique central dictates that any talent left-of-field or not in the “sweet-spot” of the status-quo can’t get a look-in, thus continues the same over-fished pool of dna to hire from, thus the continued delivery of dross.

There’s just not a big enough localised cash economy to turn the creative here around in any big way. Yet. 2030 will be a different story.

Also socially overall the fact is too that in the tiny Australian pond-like community nobody could or would even dare telling a client “Mate your marketing and your business currently suck.” Guaranteed pediocide I should imagine. 🙂

Ok, I watched it @ahem and guess what? You were right. Point taken. QED

How many creative people in advertising are actually creative? I’d guess around 5% tops. Solving the average creative brief mostly involves logic.

What’s the creativity test? Ask what other creative pursuits a creative has outside of advertising. In 16 years in the business I’ve met 3 art directors who are also artists.

Thing is, there is no necessity to be particularly creative to do the job. Most people who sell shit want advertising that’s been proven to sell shit. Fair enough.

So the job of being a creative does not require creativity. What it does require is a tenacity to take rejection and to keep going and going and going on a brief. It’s that kind of exhausting ,singular focus that makes it necessary to make being a creative a role of its own.

I think that it is one thing to come up with an idea but it is another to be able to execute it with the skills to get the best result. Regardless where the ideas come from someone needs to get it done.

In film there are still writers and production designers who work for the creative director (director) and a producer who is an account manager and creative hybrid too. Some producers are the creatives actually – they write and get the high level creative done before the director is hired.

Overall I agree with @Adam Ferrier that the old model of the creative in the agency as the central place for an idea to come from has become defunct but certainly we can’t imagine that the best work can be executed without the awesome creative talents that know the difference and make the best work get out there. As a producer that works on jobs with creatives of all types and sometimes without any on board I can vouch for the difference that a great creative can make to getting the job done well – or conversely the lack of a good creative hinders the best job being done.

I agree with @Charles Bayer (hello by the way) that there needs to be someone there who can tell the difference between a good idea and a bad one and to be sure that it is being executed to its fullest potential. We often all talk about getting ideas made without creatives on board but the issue is in what it could have been if they were.

Since when don’t films require art directors and writers?

Disagree entirely.

An idea can come from anywhere, if that place is a place filled with people who have a skill of solving problems, and have spent lots of time honing that skill.

The problem with an idea coming from anywhere is that most of the time it doesn’t. Sure an Account Manager might say something interesting, but it takes someone with the skill and understanding to recognise it as a possible solution.

Creativity comes from talent and practice. The less talent you have, the more practice you need. So ideas can’t come from anywhere. They can’t come from anyone either.

And some more self-promotion from Anne, who at the same time extends an Olive branch to the creatives her recent ‘video production’ article suggested are not necessarily required.

So, which is it Anne? Take a stance. Don’t flip flop. You can’t be Ms Popularity and everyone’s best buddy.

After 20 years in the industry, I like to think I can be creative and help come up with or build on ideas. But what so called ‘creatives’ do never ceases to amaze me. Not only do they come up with the most unexpected, fresh, out-of the-box ideas that my brain would never go to, but they do it all to a time limit over and over and over again. True, time and space is a luxury they enjoy, but I’m convinced, that people just think differently. Yes we can all play chess, some are just better at doing it than others! I like to think we are in the age of Creativity – an age where anything is possible, you just have to be able to imagine it.

@Bob is a rabbit – I’ve never had any different position if you actually listened.

Getting good value production that has the wastage cut out does not have to hinder good creative getting made. Your record is pretty tired now and unsubstantiated, I think it is time to move on.

No one is self promoting here, just being transparent. Same with Charles Bayer, Peter Rush, Alex Neizborala, and Adam Smith – no different to them.

Let’s stick to the topic at hand.

I love the way people over-think this topic. Sit down in front of the TV tonight for an hour and watch all the Ads carefully and you will notice that (in general) Advertising Agencies (Media & Creative) have become the least creative businesses anywhere. However, occasionally an Ad will appear that really smacks you in the face (in a good way) and I’ll bet every dollar I own (which is not that much unfortunately) that this was an ad conceptualised and produced by a creative agency and one of the big ones. I’m in media BTW and love working with creative agencies. Best part of my day.

You need separate skill sets.

In order to solve a client problem properly, you don’t just need talent. You need to dedicate time and energy to that process, and nothing else. If client service or anyone else did that they would have no time for the other things required of their roles.

Sure, anyone can come up with ideas, but if it was all that easy I’m sure Creative Depts would have been phased out long ago.

Thanks everyone. Judging from the responses creatives are safe just being creatives,, and highly valued too.

“Perhaps there is a roll for the creative….” like a sausage roll?