The Learn-As-You-Go University

"Why will I invest on training people that will leave in a few months?"

Have you ever heard that sentence from an advertising executive? I have. And even if you have not directly, everyone that works in advertising knows that "training" is almost a banned term.

But articles like this one on Adweek should really open every one's eyes: "Why the average barista gets more training than most agency staffers"

I have always been very sensitive to this issue. I had the chance to work in great agencies and with great people. And yes, I learned a lot, but a proper training would have made things a lot easier. Would have helped me to better understand the business. To have more tools to confront different situations. To be a better manager. And to make the agencies more money, basically by not loosing money doing things wrong.

Making mistakes is a great to learn and agencies should have a culture where it is ok to make mistakes if it is related to being more innovative or risky. That is the nature of our business. But not avoidable mistakes through proper staff training. 

We are guilty to create a culture of "Learn-As-You-Go" and it is up to us to change it. 

And the excuse of low job retention in the industry is BS. How long does a Starbucks barista last in the job?

It is a matter of doing the job right. And motivating people. For one year a led a training program at Dieste and it was great to see the young professionals not just learn new tools and skills, but to see how motivated they were by just being part of the program and acknowledge that Sr. Management took the time to teach them all that they knew about this business.

Since we like to talk a lot about ROI. An hour spent on training will give your agency a huge ROI. I promise!

Does America Love to Drive?

This week Ad Age published that BMW will launch an agency review in the US. The first thing that came to mind was what great advertising done by BMW in Spain with S.C.P.F. 

Why Spain? Well, I am from Spain, so I am closer to this story, but how BMW turned 180 degrees its communication and how that helped the company be more relevant in Spanish society (and sell more) it's a case study that everyone working in advertising should look at it.

Because BMW had great products. Great performance. Great engineering. Great technology. But had no soul. An the ¿Te gusta conducir? (Do you like to drive?) campaign I believe it showed the brand's soul for the first time. It showed that all the performance, engineering and technology had only one purpose: to make the driving experience a heavenly experience!

First ad of the ¿Te gusta conducir? campaign by S.C.P.F. 

And does America love to drive? That is the question that comes to mind after years of working with car brands and seeing how emotional is car advertising in Europe or Latin America and how rational is in the US.

Doesn't America love the feeling of slow ride in a mountain road? Doesn't America love the power of a Hemi engine shacking the car before the light goes green? Doesn't America love to take a road trip with your friends with no destination?

I know America loves to drive. So why 90% of the car ads you see today are basically the client's brief in images? 

Good luck to the agencies going after the BMW business. Hope they can bring the brand soul out!

Can you apologize in 140 characters?

It's no news that a simple tweet can cause a PR nightmare and even people to lose their job. Tell the folks at New Media Strategies that got fired by Chrysler for this tweet.

Social media (and specially Twitter) can damage your reputation in a second or, if you are Charlie Sheen, create a horde of #tigerblood thirsty animals in one day, setting up a new guinness world record.


Many traditional PR best practices and crisis management processes are now in a garbage can. Right after one of these "twitter events" occur hundreds of very bright professionals are designing new strategies, new plans, new schemes.....that will only last a week at most.


I am not a PR expert but my suggestion would be to have ready an answer in 140 characters. Don't try to explain in a PR release or give a press conference. There is not time for that. You have been struck by lightning (that as you know travel at speed of light) so your best option is to counter attack the same way.


A couple of days ago, Food Network's Chef Ina Garten has been trashed on Twitter by refusing to spend time with one of the kids from Make a Wish Foundation. 

Maybe Ina really did not have time to spend with this kid, maybe she does tones of charity work and I am sure that she is a wonderful person. But "according to twitter" she is a heartless bitch. I don't know Ina and never heard of her before yesterday, so for me this is my first impression on her. And what where we told about first impressions?


It seems that Ina does not have an official twitter account and the related account with more followers @barefootcntessa recently posted this tweet, requesting people to stop after probably receiving hundreds of unfriendly messages.

So Ina has a PR nightmare. Again, I am not expert, but if 140 characters can ruin your day maybe using the some "weapon" can help you save face. Ina, get a twitter account!

Winds of Change (Con Carácter)

First data of the 2010 Census in the US begin to show the reality that many of us living here and working with Brands in the multicultural space we knew already, the days to label people on their race are over.  The demographic explosion of the last 20 years amongst minorities, specially Hispanic, show a nation of multiple cultures/subgroups with diverging and converging similarities and differences. 


From a marketing standpoint,  prevalent assumptions about segments, both Non-Hispanic Whites and ethnic, are becoming irrelevant and even risky for brand success in this diversified consumer market.


Winds of change arrive to the advertising industry and whether you are a General Market Agency (traditionally targeting white America) or Multicultural, the time has come to really evaluate how brands should behave in this environment.


Recently, Tecate, one of the most iconic brands in terms of still targeting a very specific and hard core niche, the recent arrival Hispanic male, has begun to shift into a more inclusive strategy. Still maintaining the strategy to celebrate people with character but bringing into the creative a broader message of celebration and not just struggle. The campaign will also be running in English. It does not seem much and according to the Tecate executives this is just a test. But it is a big change for the brand.

2009 Tecate Advertising.

2011 New Tecate Campaign


You might like the creative more or less and you can argue that many brands have been shifting into a more bi-cultural (although I don't believe such thing as bi-culturalism exists, but that is for another post !) so there is not much news about this story. But I think there is, because when the brands that you would think have a more "conservative" approach begin to move, that means that there is not turning back.


Stay tuned to more news on how Brands and Agencies are trying to adjust to the diverse reality of the US consumers.

It's piñata time for CP+B

The last few days there have been two news regarding Crispin Porter + Bogusky that really upset me. I don't know personally anyone at CP+B so there is not an emotional reason to be mad. No, the reason why I am upset is because once again some people, very senior people, have decided to blame it on the agency. In the case one of the best agencies of the world.

First, Goupon announced that they would not continue to work with CP+B and CEO Andrew Mason said "Groupon was too trusting with Crispin to be edgy, informative, and entertaining, and we turned off the part of our brain where we should have made our own decisions. We learned that you can't rely on anyone else to control and maintain your own brand." 

But only a few days after the Groupon Crispin Ads aired on the Superbowl Andrew wrote on his post "I personally take responsibility; although we worked with a professional ad agency in the end, it was my decision to run the ads"

Well Mr. Mason, I think that you should fire yourself. You have worked with one of the best agencies in the world and they delivered they product that you hire them for. Didn't you know Crispin's work? Didn't they talk to you about identifying cultural tensions & changing culture? Didn't you know that these ads were going to be very notorious but also generate debate? I guess you have no idea of advertising and there is no one else to blame for it but yourself.

The other shocking news was the announcement that Burger King will not continue to work with CP+B after one of the most "creatively" productive relationships in the industry.

A lot has been written on the reasons (and even a twitter discussion between Alex Bogusky and Adage threw more fire to the matter) and I am not going to analyze in detail the whys or whynots. Bad targeting, too edge, not relevant for the franchisees, etc. I am sure everyone has an opinion but since I don't have any inside information and I was not there in the client-agency meetings I rather not make an opinion.

My main point is that once again clients take the easy way out blaming their agency for their bad results. Once again, in the Blamestorming game the supplier loses. And the real "losers" stay on their jobs.

Enough. We are not a piñata that you can hit at will. And definitely not to one of the best agencies in the world.  

Clients want agencies to be partners and share the risk. Fine with that until finger pointing begins. But remember, when you point one finger at someone, the other four point at yourself. We share the risk, we share the gold, we share the blame and we share the consequences. Call me naive but that is how I see it !

Why the poster fever to help Japan?

The current events in Japan have shocked the world and, based on its reaction, more than ever the advertising community (we did not see anything similar with other recent natural disasters like the 2004 Tsunami in the Indian Ocean where more than 230.000 died. Yes, that is right, almost a quarter of a million).

Many companies and individuals reacted immediately to help Japan and only a few hours after the earthquake we started to see the first initiatives. Google launched a person locator, as they did in Haiti and New Zealand,  FON open their WiFi signal in Japan to provide free access, iTunes Store had the Red Cross link to donate online, etc. And the creative community did what they now best, create.

But why this time creatives and designers have mobilized like never before? What is about this tragedy that inspired to create so many different mobilizing platforms? And why posters?  Is creating a poster and selling it to obtain funds the best way to help Japan? Is it the quickest?

I believe that what ever you do to help is always welcome but seeing some of the initiatives I cannot ask myself if "helping" is the only purpose. I am not a fan of making public goodwill initiatives since it might look like you are doing it to improve your image, but that is my opinion and I know that many people disagree.

Yes, I understand that if an agency like Wieden + Kennedy creates a poster it will cause PR Buzz and probably more people will be contribute to the cause. And the more initiatives the better....but always, when there is a lot not all is good. And many times we have seen some examples in which the end did not justify the means.

I believe in this case, there is no right or wrong, as long as you help. Not black or white (and this is a good topic for the first post of the blog !)