Why I’m discriminating with my new agency’s hires
In this guest post Peter Bray says it makes no sense for agencies not to reflect the communities they are supposed to be targeting.
I am involved with launching an agency in a few weeks here in the US that shall remain un-named, and we are in the process of “staffing up”. However, we already have a big problem: the founding partners are white males.
Most of our VC partners are predominantly led by white males. So the problem of diversity is one that is front of mind right now.
Potential multicultural clients have already asked if we have people who understand their audience. These are clients that any agency would kill to have. Already I have to say no, we aren’t the right company for you. We are working on it, but lets not pretend.
And this hurts. A lot.
How can we compete against a specialist multicultural agency with any hint of credibility? We can’t. It’s a bad business position we have ourselves in already. Those specialist segments add up, especially in the world’s largest advertising market.
So, I am happy to say it: I have every intention of being discriminating with all our future hires.
Will we actively seek out talented females? Yes. Will we actively seek out people from multicultural backgrounds? Yes. Does this mean that the people we will choose to hire are somehow less talented? Absolutely not.
The mind boggles as to why so many people jump to the “but you should hire people on their merits” retort. Yes we should and we will, and I am confident we will find the people we need and address the imbalance.
Here is the fact that can’t be ignored: if you have 70% of a talent pool that is male, and 30% female in creative industries (it is actually worse than this), logic says that if you want to have a balanced workforce, you need to make more effort to hire females.
The same goes for hiring people from minorities. The likelihood of having a diverse workforce is simply less likely unless you focus on it. If you want more than the 3% of female creative directors that currently exist (Fast Company, 2013), or more than the 2% of creative directors that are black (The 3% Conference, 2013) we need to get more diversity at the start of the career funnel.
There are people in some companies that don’t want to make that effort. Good for them. I’m not going to tell someone else how to run their company. That said, I do think we have both business and moral reasons to take this stance.
In the USA social issues become politicized, viewpoints are actively encouraged to be contrary and polarized, though within this is an incredible cultural melting pot that at times is a source of tremendous anguish, but at other times is astoundingly inspiring.
Cultures exist within cultures, but here is what I have noticed with regards to the US advertising industry: people recognize that it takes people from a culture to be able to most effectively communicate with that culture. Hardly a surprising revelation. Most brands and agencies in the USA understand that having a white guy write copy for the Hispanic community is not only naive, it is fairly dumb from a business perspective.
Likewise, insights are even harder to develop about a culture when you are an outsider. Unless we fix the problem from the start, we are going to miss out on opportunities. I could extrapolate to the issues with having a creative department full of guys from roughly the same ethnic and socio economic backgrounds. How does that make sense for a company that is communicating to a diverse range of people?
To borrow a phrase, advertising should be created “by the people, for the people.” Does it not make sense to try and mirror the makeup of the people we are talking to in order to gain even a 1% edge when it comes to our understanding?
Forgetting the moral implications for a moment, diversity results in better work. Many US agencies still have massive diversity issues, the difference to Australia is that many clients here regard diversity in the agency they are hiring as a key factor.
And then there is the matter of doing simply what some feel is right.
If I was judging our industry from Mumbrella comments alone, we come across as a bunch of insecure assholes.
Some may even argue that to be true more generally. However, we all know that this isn’t the case. Almost everyone I have met in advertising has been intelligent, friendly, questioning and interesting, even when faced with vehement disagreement.
So given this, and the fact we are experts in an incredibly influential medium, why would we not choose to actively address social imbalances? People win their Cannes Lions by doing that big pro bono piece, but what about the rest of the year? Indeed, I would argue we can choose to have a moral duty (note that I do regard it as a choice) to ensure that our depictions of all races, religions, beliefs, genders and sexual preferences are recognized in the advertising we create.
Though we are a mirror we do more than just reflect. How can we be a mirror if within an agency we are all coming from such similar starting points?
For those who may feel ashamed about the advertising industry, think about this: every day you have the direct ability to influence how someone else regards another person. That is real power.
You want to make effective campaigns? Work with more people that have informed opinions about who you are trying to talk to. Saying “that’s just the way it is” or that “we searched and searched but couldn’t find anybody” is a cop out. We can have all the task forces and industry initiatives we want, the change starts in the buildings we are in. We can all do better business and better for the people around us, myself included.
- Peter Bray is currently starting an agency in the US, and is the former head of digital at Saacthi & Saatchi NY
Peter, I’m guessing about 25% of your clients target products or services to people over 45?
Therefore, will you be discrimminating against young people by hiring some over 45s?
User ID not verified.
Wow, this PR piece is disgusting.
Peter is about to launch his agency. He reads on Mumbo the latest outrage and quite possibly, I imagine his thinking would perhaps be along the lines of:
‘OMG – what will happen to us when we send out our launch news, with all white men? Everyone will point to us as another sign of white male dominance. But WE ARE white male dominant. OK. Think Peter, think. Ok. I can admit it. Good idea. Ill admit it, and write how I feel bad and how I’ll try to make up for it by being discriminatory – the other way! That way I can position us as a leader on the issue.’
(Sarah note: this is my creative example of what Peter might be thinking, I’m not saying I can read his mind).
Peter, WHY DID YOU ONLY PARTNER WITH WHITE MEN?
You, your colleagues (and your agency) won’t be seen as ‘diverse’ because you admitted fault (‘sorry, my bad’) 48 hours after the major storm blew up on the issue. You trying to ‘turn a negative into a positive.’
You had a chance to really change things at the top. You’re an owner. I mean, how can you talk badly about ECDs and hiring managers and the industry wide problem when you did EXACTLY THE SAME THING.
Why don’t you bring in someone into your group, now? It’s not too late. And not just a token.
The idea of 3-5 white men sitting around a table, drinking beers and laughing as the money comes in, about how diverse they are because they’ve played the PR machine like a tune to hire women as managers, who report to them – makes me sick.
I’m sure the Leo’s bunch feel quite bad, like a realisation. It’s a eureka moment for them, and possibly a catalyst for change for them.
You and your agency seems to have already had that moment, but proceeded ahead with your friends anyway.
Or are there no good media women with business savvy to ask to join your venture?
User ID not verified.
interesting.
User ID not verified.
ps Will be very surprised if Mumbo publishes my post, as politics would say ‘let’s not scare away possible guest posts.’
User ID not verified.
Make sense to aim to ‘mirror the makeup of the people we are talking to.’
Which often makes sticking to gender issues too narrow and negates Advertising’s role in the huge western Commercial juggernaut: Message to millions to sell.
I specialise in food products. If your Agency client base is 80% consumer food products, you need at least 80% staff to know how to do it effectively. Your aim to drill down and match into specific markets is refreshing. I, in turn will be relieved to find a graphic designer who knows best colour practices for food packaging,and doesn’t back off from the foodie words such as ‘ethnic, vegan, gluten and Italian.” Rather than a ‘token’ whose bewildered face is there just to appease a very noisy ‘enraged’ group.
Is that so hard? Time for some people to get on their high horse and gallop away.
User ID not verified.
@Sarah I was asked to write the piece, I didn’t approach Mumbrella. Nor did I mention the agency name. Interestingly the business partners weren’t friends prior, we came together as a result of a system that makes it easier for white males. As we are in a position of power, should we try and change the system? I say yes. Hopefully my post provokes more thought and rational discussion.
@Peter Rush Ageism is an industry problem too. Absolutely we will attempt to have diversity in this respect as well.
User ID not verified.
@Sarah After working with old mate PB back in Australia, I guarantee you one thing, he will definitely ensure there’ll be a strong representation of women in his shop 😉
User ID not verified.
@Sarah, I can 100% back up what Sam said above.
User ID not verified.
this is ridiculous. opportunistic at best. so this only became an issue worth putting in writing (that also hurts so much) coincidentally right when there was a chance to trade press a new agency?
no issues when dealing with hires, funding sources etc … hard to look credible taking a moral stance when it’s done so publicly.
User ID not verified.
hey Media Beard Guy Peter did not mention his agency name, his comment above shows he didn’t volunteer to write it . . . and it isn’t even an Aussie agency, hardly done for PR . . . what is he supposed to do, shut up??? If your big takeaway from his article was that you felt it was PR then check your blind spot, its huge. Thank you Peter for helping higlight diversity issues.
User ID not verified.
btw @Sarah too,
If you can honestly stand up in front of a room of men and women who are very conscious of the diversity issue in advertising, and tell them:
‘Yes, this new agency’s ownership is all white men. Yes they all know it. Yes it’s true, they could have included someone else in the group. Yes, they did not. HOWEVER, as they wrote a piece in Mumbo promising to be bias and hiring mainly women, who will report to them.’
If you honestly think that this message is helping the diversity issue, and that they should actually be thanked for this, well my friend, it is you who has a bigger blind spot than Tony Abbott.
User ID not verified.