So I’m in Singapore today judging the Asian Marketing Effectiveness Awards.
Over the past few weeks – through the preliminary judging – it’s been really interesting to see what some people think qualifies as ‘effective’.
Some seem to think it’s about views.
Some seem to think it’s about likes.
Some seem to think it’s about free PR coverage.
Some seem to think the client had nothing to do with the result.
[And don’t get me started on those who achieve effectiveness by fine-tuning the category convention, rather than taking the category to a new place. I know it still counts, but for me, it’s less about long term change and more about short-term maximisation. Nothing wrong with that, I just think we should – and can – achieve much, much more]
Of course not every entry was like this, there were some amazing case studies … well written and undeniably demonstrating the role communication had on the sales result for the client … but the fact there are still people who think effectiveness is measured on popularity rather than quantifiable, commercially valuable results, scares the crap out of me and makes me wonder who the hell is teaching them that viewpoint.
But there is another thing that I think all award shows need to start thinking about.
I know English is the language of business, but for many agencies across Asia, that is not necessarily true – so to expect people to write entries in a language that is not their own, immediately puts them at a disadvantage.
Yes, I know the results should speak for themselves, but we all know that’s not strictly true – the way submissions are written goes a huge way towards informing [or manipulating] the judges opinion.
I don’t really know how we can change this to result in a genuinely level playing field, regardless of which nation the agency comes from, which is why any agency who wins an AME and doesn’t come from an English speaking language deserves extra praise and accolade for their efforts and successes.
And to then I’ll be clapping the loudest and the longest.