The MSiX Awards: Why agencies and academics need to work together to embrace science and creativity
Nicolas Pontes, lecturer in advertising at QUT Business School, explains why it’s high time for the MSiX marketing science awards.
It is time for agencies to embrace science and for universities to embrace real world applications. Granted, some already do. But not only that, it is time to encourage conversations between agencies and academics so that great work that bridges the gap between science and practice is not only recognised, but used to advance our field.
Advertising is a fast changing industry that has been significantly impacted by the development of new technologies and the fragmentation of media.
Because of data availability, it is possible to better understand human behaviour and, in turn, design better targeted messages. However, the one thing that has not changed – and perhaps will not change – is that advertising is about creating messages that resonate with the intended audience.
Great article and totally agree. The top agencies are starting to form relationships with universities, all should be doing it. Very rare for a university to jump on the front foot and initiate this kind of thinking.
Nicolas, thank you for sharing.
I disagree a wee bit,
a) that we as marketers don’t reserve the ‘art’ of advertising for the ‘inspired’, i feel agency is still pretty hierarchical about that. Yet even still, I would argue ‘inspired’ thought comes from a more diverse crowd in agency than academia can currently tout. You are more likely to see a coordinator using data and insight to suggest strategy that delivers a result than see an honours student allowed to propose a new academic concept of interest in the academic community will uphold.
b) that another industry award brings Academia and Agency closer in a meaningful way. I honestly don’t mean to be rude, but my first thought of the MSiX awards (after a 6 second peruse of the link), was ‘ah, this will be a cute acronym, I will never learn the definition of, but can add to a raft of other DR, media math and measurable impact credentials on my next pitch’.
c) that agency is moving away from empirical data. Yes, common sense is a regular overlay by those who were spat out of 3-6 years of theory, however, agency and in particular media are building entire economies based on a value for science and data. Agency are responsible for more mathematicians driving luxury vehicles and you can thank SWT/DAN/PO/IPG for having to explain to your students the malapropism that is econometric modelling.
d) that academia is any better at understanding ‘the fast changing’ technologies and fragmentation of the media landscape than the real time data and tools on offer and being pioneered for agency and ‘the real world’.
I say this all with respect as a; sessional academic (in your faculty), current agency staff member and a post grad drop out with doubts on academia’s ability to contribute fast original thought. I am a huge advocate for academia and industry calibrating regularly. But pretty content to wax circuitous amends to ad theory in a cigar filled den at 2am in the pompous manner in which we are accustomed rather than another bougy gala affair.
Sorry to be a hater, happy to chat about it in person, Edwina L has my details,
Yours sincerely,
An unlikely future winner of a MSiX award.
Hi Grant I think you’ve pretty well summed up why academia and the industry don’t mix, by your attitude behind these words.
@Funny, How so?
I really don’t mean to perpetuate negativity in social forums, that was my attempt at a legitimate critic to a suggested new idea from academia. I would personally define the ‘attitude behind these words’ as respectfully critical with a touch of sass.
Call me on my s**** if you don’t think that’s a fair assement of my attitude. But it wasn’t meant to be a slander of the author, academia or the false economy of marketing awards (okay maybe that last one).
But are the ‘Universities for the Real World’ not game to engage with a conversation with such an attitude?
Must agency tone be aggreeable and monotone to share with an academic?
Because then perhaps you would be right, agency land is full of waffling verbose A-holes such as myself.
But now you have hurt my feelings insinuating I am boasting an attitude that is anything more than critical, jovial and inviting for a bit of debate. @funny et’s not loose touch with the fact we are talking about something very frivolous, marketing is not ‘actually’ important and not worth us not being internet friends over.
I will refrain from trolling mumbrella and share my opinions with my coordinator who I know shares similar critiques. We will only stand to strengthen our own beliefs. You can thank this exchange for being responsible for a futher devide in the younger generations interest in academia.
why do psychologists and behavioural scientists always turn to the physical sciences for their immutable laws of nature. Let’s have some examples from your own discipline!