"What do Planning Directors want from Planning?" A review of the APG seminar by Louise Nolder, Ogilvy

back to sharp stick

It was with some trepidation that I agreed to review this talk, as it was some months ago that a full house assembled at St Luke's to hear Mia Kennedy (AMV) and Mark Earls (St Luke's), shed light on what it is that Planning Directors are looking for. What did I remember? Anything? I wracked my memory and asked colleagues to do the same. Interestingly, we came out at the same key thoughts. It is these nuggets that I will pass on.

Mia kicked off by outlining the key skills that she feels are the '5 Planning Commandments':

• The Work, The Work, The Work - Planners have 3 strings to their bow: (1) Contributing to fantastic creative through outstanding strategic development and briefing; (2) evaluating and honing the strategy; and (3) adding value via NPD, naming etc. A good planner does all three.
• Be a Radiator not a Drain - Enthuse on your subject. Be a catalyst for others and create energy and dynamism.
• Inquisitive, Inventive, Inspirational -Ask different questions, invent new solutions and inspire others to greatness.
• Many ways to skin a cat - Use the strengths of others to address a problem
• Be a rubber band - Delight in a flexible approach. Take your thinking in many different directions. Stretch yourself.

As day-to-day planning covers all sorts of areas, it was helpful to be given a definitive checklist. As we all sub-consciously reflected on how we matched up to these inspiring (if exhausting) credentials, Mark took the floor and took the evening in a slightly different direction.

Mark delivered an inspired attack on a 'sacred cow' of planning - asking the consumer. Whilst talking to users is beneficial to get a snapshot of where a brand is now, Mark felt they have little to offer when it comes to brand evolution. He felt that consumers could only play back what they know - offering a one- dimensional view lacking freshness and insight. Radical brand development can be impaired by 'reality checking' of this nature - asking consumers via research only puts the hand brake on genuine innovation. His solution was to guard the brand development process against those who use it, as they will only judge it by their own conventions.

These radical views were refreshing. In principle, many agreed that brand development should occur without constant glances in the rear-view mirror. However, lively debate ensued as planners working on traditional business tried in vain to reconcile their client requirements with Mark's 'gut-feel' approach. There was consensus that reliance on research and consumers for brand leaps was impossible. However, 90% of planners felt required to work within an existing framework were not in a position to throw away a client's brand development process. Others felt that managing the client's perception of risk would be a full time job in itself. Sympathy with Mark's purist rhetoric did not mean that his approach would work on many accounts (despite clear evidence of its success for St Luke's)

The meeting broke up with everyone vowing to be more inspirational and inject some of Marks passion into more traditional brand development. Planners left vowing to put a more radical approach into practice if they ever got the chance.

(c) Account Planning Group 1995-2002

back to sharp stick