Why Creative Effectiveness is the Cannes Lion you really want to win
With controversy over the criteria of entry for some Cannes Lions categories Phil Johnston argues the Creative Effectiveness category is the most rigorous ‘effie’ in the world.
Don’t worry. I’m not entering the debate on whether some Lion winners are scam. There are enough voices on that.
And my starting point isn’t even creativity. Because let’s not forget that creativity is just a means to an end. What is that end? Meeting our clients’ objectives, whatever they may be. That’s what I’m here to do.
If you work in an agency that’s what you should be doing as well. If you don’t, you’re in the wrong game.
You should want to be winning Effectiveness Awards. It’s proof that you’re doing the job your clients need you to be doing. And when it comes to winning effectiveness awards, the Cannes Creative Effectiveness category sets the benchmark.
Here’s why:
1. Credibility.
Cannes Lions employ Price Waterhouse Coopers to audit every Effectiveness entry they receive. And boy are they relentless. After we’d entered they came back to us on three separate occasions, each time asking for verification of data and claims that we made in our case study (Virgin Mobile: Fair Go Bro featuring Doug Pitt). And giving them the source of the data wasn’t enough, they needed to see the original reports/documents from which the data came.
That thoroughness and scrutiny means that you know a Cannes Effectiveness winner is credible.
2. You’re battling the best.
Only work that either won a Lion or was shortlisted the year previously is eligible for entry. So you know your case study is going up against some of the best creative work in the world.
We all know creativity and effectiveness go hand in hand. Various extensive research studies have proven it, most notably the Gunn Report and the IPA/Gunn Study. Creativity sells. No argument on that.
Because you’re up against some of the most creative work you’re up against some of the most effective work too.
3. It’s Global
You’re fighting in a much bigger pond. The world. It doesn’t get any bigger. Enough said.
The reasons above are why you should want to win a Cannes Creative Effectiveness Lion. But looked at very simply it’s about this: It’s indisputable proof that your agency (and you) are doing a damn fine job by your clients.
So that’s the ‘why’, what about the ‘how’?
Having written a case study this year I have a few observations on what might help you win. I’m not arrogant enough to think I know all the answers but my experience might just help you get over the line next year.
Realism: Take a look at previous winners (and Effie winners too). Ask yourself if you’ve got the data you need to meet the level of proof you can see in these winning cases. Be harsh on what you’ve got. If you don’t have the proof you need, save yourself the time and effort. Because, believe me, winning will take a lot of both.
Focus: Work out what your storyline is, make it as singular as possible and bloody well stick to it. Think of the amount of cases the judges have to read. The tighter your story the more likely they are to stick with it. No detours, no cul-de-sacs, every word and piece of data supporting the focused story you are weaving.
Perseverance: Each time a Price Waterhouse Coopers request came through for more proof of data I was so close to giving it all away. It was only a streak of stubbornness I didn’t realise I had that kept me going. That and the help, patience and lots of data from the great people at Virgin Mobile, One Green Bean and Starcom, our partner agencies on Virgin Mobile. Stick with it, you just never know.
So, no debate about Cannes Creative Effectiveness Lions. They are a demanding and credible celebration of effectiveness. And that’s why you should really want to win one. Because they prove what we all instinctively know.
Great work, works.
Phil Johnston, Havas Worldwide head of strategy, wrote the Virgin Mobile Doug Pitt case study which won one of six Creative Effectiveness Gold Lions at Cannes this year. This year McCann Melbourne won the Grand Prix while DDB Sydney also won in the category.
Well said Phil. This is what’s really at the heart of the awards problem – that all winners should stand up to the ultimate test of advertising which is delivering a business result. I appreciate the need to encourage creativity – but it should be hand in hand with effectiveness. “Scam” ads only win because the awards don’t do the rigour in checking the business results they achieved – they couldn’t exist if they had to pass a acid test of hard metrics achieved. Campaigns cost millions of dollars to create and promote – all award winners should be put through the above rigour and why aren’t they? We want to learn from award winning work which ideas drove the best results at the same time as which ones challenged the advertising world with a new way of doing things.
Lets refocus the award debate and look at the bigger problem that allows scam ads to exist in the first place. We will all be smarter, better at our jobs, and have happier clients if we achieve this if we raise the standards required to win to include business results combined with great creative ideas.
Thanks for writing this!
User ID not verified.
an excellent excellent article with sound advice and i thoroughly agree with the premise that this is the only award worth winning
congratulations, too
it was a great campaign on all levels
User ID not verified.
well said Phil and congrats on the Creative Effectiveness gong this year for VM
User ID not verified.
I thought the Doug Pitt campaign was derivative of an old US insurance campaign that featured siblings of famous people….look it up.
It ran headlines like “What if your names Evert and you cant play tennis?” (Featuring Chris Everts sister) etc etc…..
I am sure price waterhouse cooper wouldnt have an idea about that.
Anyway…agree about the other sentiments of the article.
User ID not verified.
Nice work PB
User ID not verified.
It was a great team from all sides who worked on that campaign… Well done all.
User ID not verified.
So only the Effectiveness campaigns are audited by PWC for veracity.
Got it. The other categories are/can be just “art”. Effectiveness is definitely “advertising’ then.
User ID not verified.
Nice puff piece, but given all the creatives and suits who created that campaign have left the agency, I’d say Havas’ days in the sun are pretty limited. Especially now the ECD concerned has left too.
User ID not verified.