How Advertising's Blurred Lines Are Being Embraced

In the current issue of shots, issue 164, we speak to a selection of the advertising industry about the continually blurring lines of the business.

With agencies, more and more, taking production capabilities in-house, production companies often working direct with clients and post houses broadening their creative horizons too, what does that mean for the industry at large?

Here, four people from three companies; Barry Jones, founder and CEO at marketing implementation agency, Hogarth; Helen Hadfield and Kat Downs, EP and new business manager respectively for Bare Films, and Dan Scott-Croxford, head of content at Stinkstudios, debate the altering dynamics of advertising. 

Why do you think the lines between what an agency, production company and post house can (and should) do have blurred so much in recent years?

Jones: Lines have blurred for several reasons. The volume and diversity of production work has grown enormously. Traditionally, marketing campaigns had a limited number of channels for exhibition and were focused around a primary ‘hero’ advertisement’. Marketing materials now vary hugely in type and size: from global rollouts to multiple iterations of programmatic content - the lines have blurred because the traditional model is not capable of confronting these scale changes.

Scott-Croxford: Tech. We can do and see things faster and cheaper than ever before. As a result of this there is a thirst for immediacy and clients need to be able to react quickly. A traditional agency/ production/ post pipeline is not built to turn something around in a matter of days. It is therefore inevitable that efficiencies in cost and time are being sought when the number and new types of assets required is increasing and the lead times are decreasing.

Do you think that the businesses blurred lines can be a good thing for clients, enabling greater creative choice?

Jones: Unequivocally, this blurring of agency, post and production has been good for clients. Many of our larger clients like Nestle, J&J and Unilever are now finding more good work when they look across all three channels. Similarly, these new models are a boon to small and mid-sized production houses who may have found the traditional agency-led model too constraining.

Downs: From the standpoint of a production company we are always going to feel that it’s in the client’s best interest to have a production company produce their project for them alongside the agency. The specialist care, attention, resources and expertise of a production company cannot be undervalued. Plus, our relationship with our directors is key and I think that’s a vital component that’s missing when agencies engage freelance directors or have a director loaned out to them.

Scott-Croxford: Choice is great. Who wouldn’t want choice? The important thing is to work with the best partner for the needs of the brand. Once you have chosen your partner on a project then it is about collaboration - collaborating together to get the best possible outcome.

Have your companies looked/needed to evolve their own offering(s) and working methods in response to the changing market?

Downs: We have; we just launched our Bare Content site to showcase those non-traditional projects we are working on. One project in particular that we were so thrilled about was Chris Goulder’s Deliveries Before Dawn film, which was nominated at the British Arrows in branded content.

It was written, directed, edited and launched within a week and in time for Halloween; it was a great example of direct-to-client work. A number of our directors are creatives/writers as well as directors and it’s something we really want to utilise going forward in our approach. 

Scott-Croxford: [Stink] has been working in long form branded content for many years now. But it became apparent that the traditional model was not always working for us. We were seeing really cool and creative projects that we wanted to engage on more and more in the world of ‘content’, and as with Stinkdigital, the decision was to take a very serious approach towards this world and create a team of specialists.

Stinkstudios is completely agnostic in the way that we work and we see ourselves as a service. A service that anyone can use at any point in their project. Now, more than ever it takes collaboration to tackle the challenges we are facing.

What do you think the negative impact of the democratisation of those traditional industry lines might be?

Jones: The negative impact of this democratisation will be felt as we move from older ways of working to the new. While the new production model is catching on, many agencies and clients may be held back by deep rooted connections to the older way of working, and transitions can sometimes take significant time and effort. It is inevitable that some dinosaurs will die.

Scott-Croxford: Distrust. If we become too protective about what we feel we should or shouldn’t be handling then I think that will have a negative impact. Similar services are being offered across the board so let’s make sure tasks fall with the best/right people on each individual project.

Do you think that some agencies’ relationships with production companies could suffer due to taking more things in-house?

Jones: While agencies adjust to the new environment and start taking more work in-house, there will be tensions with their traditional production company partners. However, what’s happening is not just a restructuring of the way existing work is done, but also a massive expansion in the overall volume of work. Those that can adapt will be fine.

Downs: Of course, that’s a possibility. In previous years I feel there was always a hesitation from production companies to go direct-to-client on projects for fear of annoying agencies and possibly jeopardising their relationship with them. But now it feels very much a gloves-off situation.

Of course, we still look to agencies for the majority of our work but the landscape is changing and by the shift of work going in house at agencies it has freed up the market for production companies to go direct to clients. 

Scott-Croxford: I would like to think not. We are not an agency ourselves and work often with agencies. I think there is a understanding from both sides of the fence that projects are really tough now. We’re all trying to react to our demands and deliver the best quality for clients, and sometimes that requires collaboration. Sometimes it does not.

Are some production companies right to be concerned about increased competition and what some refer to as ‘a land grab’ by agencies?

Jones: Increased competition is never welcome; but the specialist production company businesses have a significant head start on any agencies looking to make a ‘land grab’, in terms of reputation, experience and talent. And, we should not forget that there’s now more ‘land’ to be grabbed. Increased competition will make us all work smarter, pitch harder and innovate, but this can ultimately only be positive for our company and our clients.

Do you think we will eventually see the industry evolve to a point where there is no distinction between an agency/production company/post house?

Jones: Already agencies are producing films and production companies are coming up with executional ideas. The traditional delineation is already blurring. However, we do think that strategic creativity will be the province of the blue chip agencies for the foreseeable future, whilst sophisticated and high end production projects will continue to provide work for the specialist production facilities. But overall we don’t think it’s a good time for any company to try and stand still.

Hadfield: I think, optimistically, that because advertising is a creative hot-house of emerging and established talent, and because we have a very small film industry, that there will always be a strong drive towards creative excellence and anything that dilutes it to an unpalatable extent will short-change the market and so will ultimately defeat itself.

However, I have no doubt that new ways of working should and can evolve but we need to make sure we don’t cling on to comfortable territory for the sake of it, but we need to direct the necessary revolution in a positive manner and a complete lack of distinction would result in less choice, less competition and less need to make a creative difference. That creative difference is actually the secret to success.