Continuation of our article on advertising standards. Here is the examination of a communication which can in every way satisfy the requirements of an advertising effectiveness standard, such as most of them are constructed today. So what do you think of this film?
It is important to understand that the standard is one indicator among others, making it possible to monitor the performance of a copy.
During advertising development the standard is used to mainly monitor so-called “business” indicators * which are generally: emergence, the level of identification, memorization of the brand, the place of the product... in order to be sure not to advertise for the category but for its brand and ultimately obtain a real impact on sales.
Here is an example of advertising that could perform on these business indicators as defined above. Let's talk about hearing aids,Sonalto! Watch this short advertising film:
This advertising necessarily performs on business indicators such as brand memorability, emergence, humor...using old tricks that are creative but nevertheless effective: situational ridicule/humor, the rehashing of the brand, the play on words with the main character, irritating music linked to the story which helps maintain engagement (even if it is negative), the call for action at the end. In short, an advertising recipe that allows emergence, impact and memorization (his highness/Sonalto), in short the standardized trinity of advertising effectiveness.
However, is it really effective advertising for the brand and its business? Or is it the reproduction of a good recipe, used since the 80’s when the rules of mainstream TV advertising were king? Will this advertising really establish a brand, help nurture equity and ultimately support sales? How will the standard have allowed this brand to really capitalize on its advertising investment beyond its half-yearly media plan and the mechanical notoriety that results from it?
The question we can ask ourselves when seeing this advertisement is: where is the consumer?
Why would someone with hearing problems choose this brand’s value proposition over another after watching this ad? In what way someone watching would say “Hey, we’re talking about me, it’s really for me”.
Let us remember that the solution itself “why go for tailor-made hearing aids when there are ready-to-wear solutions” responds to a real need, in particular to a motivation of social comfort and to a tension of price/complexity, there is therefore a real insight behind it. It’s an excellent product and a real innovation! But it's very implicit in the copy. We understand that the product is self-service in pharmacies and that therefore means that it is OTC and therefore an equivalent of self-service glasses. But there are too many levels of deduction for the end consumer, exposed to more than 5,000 advertising messages per day.
Wouldn't it be more effective to first and foremost be sure to respond to a real consumer expectation based on who they are, their habits, their daily life, and to formulate it explicitly before implementing the solution as such?
Advertising is a value proposition in itself. It supports positive motivation and resolves consumer tension; in short, it responds to an insight and therefore to the expectations of a given target. Creation is an ultra-powerful tool to support this proposition, to ensure that the message gets across. In a strategic context of differentiation, it is even the essential element of disruption.
But can it not really perform unless the targets recognize each other, can immediately see and feel that they are known and understood. Only then is the message able to hold attention, emerge immediately and be remembered. Sometimes the standard allows it...but it's random, it was not built on these rules.
A reflection on the support of advertising development must lead to reviewing the process in order to put the consumer at the heart of creative development...and this well upstream of development, from the communication brief even before any execution translation.
Because in-depth knowledge of the different consumer segments for a given brand, with a message adapted for each of these segments, all supported by creative, appears to be a more suitable development framework in a context where mass communication is less and less popular and therefore effective.
This requires internal reflection on the part of the advertiser regarding the advertising development process (in a context where time-to-market will not be delayed), more inclusive work between the different agencies (creative/media/institutes) and an effort to understand the different consumer segments upstream, not necessarily more time-consuming, but much more in-depth.
*I indicate “business” in parentheses because the weight of communications in the entire marketing mix corresponds to approximately 10%, which is important but not sufficient to really be a business KPI.