During the pitch process, clients are not just looking for the agency they should hire. More importantly, they are looking at the agencies they should not hire. An agency needs to clear a number of hurdles in order to win the business. Some of the hurdles are obvious: creative, strategy, capabilities. But some of the hurdles are more difficult to see coming: charisma, likability, chemistry.
First let’s take a look at the obvious hurdles. When it comes to creative, clients are not only looking for good creative (and you can define good however you like), but they are looking very closely to make sure that the creative is on strategy. In both pharma and consumer pitches, I have seen creative presented that was not completely on strategy. There are typically a number of reasons for this. One is that it was politically not a good move to kill the concept. Perhaps the creative person had another concept killed and the team did not want to kill two concepts from the same person. Another reason could be that the concept was really exciting and sexy. While agencies will frequently argue that clients can’t spot great creative (this may or may not be true), clients can absolutely spot concepts that are off strategy. Present them at your own peril.
Another hurdle that the agency needs to clear is strategy. Unfortunately, sometimes the strategy to market a drug is pretty clear, and numerous agencies will wind up on the same strategy. If the strategy from agency to agency is the same, the winning agency frequently is the one that either did the most compelling research or did the best presentation of the strategy.
Research is the piece that establishes that the strategy is solid and not just your team’s opinion. Presentation skill is the component that develops the necessary excitement around your strategy. Do not think for a moment that presentation skill can’t be the difference between winning and losing. A better presentation of similar content can push your agency across the finish line first.
Capabilities is a different kind of hurdle. One would expect that if you make it to the pitch, you have made it over the capabilities hurdle. If you are a smaller agency and made it into the finals against larger competition, have you ever lost because the client wound up wanting a bigger, more established agency? If so, did you really make it over the capabilities hurdle? There is nothing you can do to make your agency bigger overnight, but it does make you question pitching a product when you know that you are at a disadvantage. A competitor three times your size is three times as likely to have someone on staff that is an expert in the therapeutic area being pitched, and their new business budget could be five times the size of your new business budget. I am not suggesting that you never pitch against larger competition; I am suggesting that you recognize when the cards are stacked against you and choose your battles wisely.
Charisma, likeability and chemistry come from a combination of factors, some of which are in your control, some not so much. Some people are naturally more charismatic as presenters. In many ways chemistry is a crap shoot. That being said, rehearsal can help to improve those areas. Once you are confident in what you are going to say, you can start to concentrate on connecting with the audience and being more personable. As rehearsals progress, presenters tend to spend less time worrying about the words and more time focusing on the audience.
When the strategy and creative are similar from agency to agency, presentation skill plays a larger and larger role. Two of our clients pitched a major retailer a few years ago. The agency fee (not including media) was well over $30 million per year. While each agency had its advantages, the winning agency was simply more likeable. Even the losing agency admits that they are not particularly warm in a pitch. The winning agency views warmth and charm as an important part of their presentation and works hard to dial it up. The other agency is also very smart, but they present the facts as they see them and make little attempt to connect with the audience. It is difficult to say that charm was the deciding factor, but connecting with the audience is in every agency’s control and is not something that should be ignored. It is not just the words but how you say the words. This is the last hurdle that you have to clear in order to win.
Mark Schnurman
President - Filament Inc.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
One pitch, one leader
The single biggest characteristic of winning agencies is that they have a clear leader for every pitch. Rather than a bunch of people who think they are the leader, a team needs a very clear, one-to-one relationship: one leader for one pitch.
The pitch leader’s primary role is to keep the process moving. The leader is the final arbiter when there is a discussion about things such as strategy or creative. This does not mean that the leader makes every decision. It does mean that this individual makes sure a decision is made and that the process keeps moving.
Far too often agencies get derailed discussing a subtlety of strategy or creative when they would have been better served to move on with the process. The pitch leader needs to remind the team that the clock is ticking, and every minute the team spends on the particular topic at hand is one less minute that they have for the rest of the process.
The natural question becomes who should be the leader.
The advantage of the new business person becoming the leader is that this individual frequently sourced the lead and is very connected to the prospect. He is frequently a very strong strategic person with a great understanding of the new business process. While these are great advantages, the one disadvantage can be huge: no one on the pitch team reports to him. As a result, he can persuade and cajole pitch team members to do their jobs, but he has no hammer. To make matters worse, it is his rear-end in a sling if he loses the pitch. To sum up, the new business person is responsible for winning and is compensated and evaluated on the agencies win rate, but he has virtually no power to get people to execute the pitch. Not an enviable scenario.
The creative director can be a good choice because a large part of the pitch process and a good deal of the last minute work is in her department. She is the best person to crack the whip on the creative department, and she understands the numerous issues that can come up in the creative department during a pitch. There are two basic disadvantages. The first is that it can be difficult to get account services and strategy to listen to the creative director. The second is that process orientation is typically not a term used to describe creative directors, and the ability to stick to a process is very important in working a team through a pitch.
Similar to the creative director, the head of account services or strategy can make a good leader. The advantage is that a good portion of the team reports to him, and he is likely more process and schedule driven than a creative director. The disadvantage is that the creative team does not report to him, and he is not as tuned into the creative process as a creative director. This can lead to a certain amount of resentment when the pitch leader is trying to drive the creative team to stop tweaking and start rehearsing when that pitch leader has never been in that art director’s chair and does not understand the creative process.
The head of the agency is the obvious choice for a number of reasons. Everyone reports to her, so she should have no problem motivating people. Sticking to the process should not be an issue for her. But even the agency head has a few potential downsides that need to be addressed. First, the pitch leader needs to be at most, if not all, of the meetings. If the leader is not present, the leadership vacuum can grind the process to a halt. The second is that the leader needs to be careful to lead the process and not simply take over the process. Because of their role at the agency, suggestions made by managing directors and CEO are frequently taken as mandates by well-meaning staff. As a result, the process can turn into one person’s thinking.
While it may seem as if there is no ideal pitch leader, by simply managing the disadvantages of each potential leader’s role, you can develop a strong pitch process. I have seen people from each role be great pitch leaders, and I have seen people from each role fall prey to the disadvantages listed above. The key is insure that you have one person running the show. While we can discuss which person will make the best pitch leader, typically a committee will have all of the disadvantages listed above without any of the strengths. This is not to say that a committee can’t work, but you will make the process more difficult and painful than it needs to be.
Mark Schnurman
Pitch Consultant
www.filamentinc.com
The pitch leader’s primary role is to keep the process moving. The leader is the final arbiter when there is a discussion about things such as strategy or creative. This does not mean that the leader makes every decision. It does mean that this individual makes sure a decision is made and that the process keeps moving.
Far too often agencies get derailed discussing a subtlety of strategy or creative when they would have been better served to move on with the process. The pitch leader needs to remind the team that the clock is ticking, and every minute the team spends on the particular topic at hand is one less minute that they have for the rest of the process.
The natural question becomes who should be the leader.
The advantage of the new business person becoming the leader is that this individual frequently sourced the lead and is very connected to the prospect. He is frequently a very strong strategic person with a great understanding of the new business process. While these are great advantages, the one disadvantage can be huge: no one on the pitch team reports to him. As a result, he can persuade and cajole pitch team members to do their jobs, but he has no hammer. To make matters worse, it is his rear-end in a sling if he loses the pitch. To sum up, the new business person is responsible for winning and is compensated and evaluated on the agencies win rate, but he has virtually no power to get people to execute the pitch. Not an enviable scenario.
The creative director can be a good choice because a large part of the pitch process and a good deal of the last minute work is in her department. She is the best person to crack the whip on the creative department, and she understands the numerous issues that can come up in the creative department during a pitch. There are two basic disadvantages. The first is that it can be difficult to get account services and strategy to listen to the creative director. The second is that process orientation is typically not a term used to describe creative directors, and the ability to stick to a process is very important in working a team through a pitch.
Similar to the creative director, the head of account services or strategy can make a good leader. The advantage is that a good portion of the team reports to him, and he is likely more process and schedule driven than a creative director. The disadvantage is that the creative team does not report to him, and he is not as tuned into the creative process as a creative director. This can lead to a certain amount of resentment when the pitch leader is trying to drive the creative team to stop tweaking and start rehearsing when that pitch leader has never been in that art director’s chair and does not understand the creative process.
The head of the agency is the obvious choice for a number of reasons. Everyone reports to her, so she should have no problem motivating people. Sticking to the process should not be an issue for her. But even the agency head has a few potential downsides that need to be addressed. First, the pitch leader needs to be at most, if not all, of the meetings. If the leader is not present, the leadership vacuum can grind the process to a halt. The second is that the leader needs to be careful to lead the process and not simply take over the process. Because of their role at the agency, suggestions made by managing directors and CEO are frequently taken as mandates by well-meaning staff. As a result, the process can turn into one person’s thinking.
While it may seem as if there is no ideal pitch leader, by simply managing the disadvantages of each potential leader’s role, you can develop a strong pitch process. I have seen people from each role be great pitch leaders, and I have seen people from each role fall prey to the disadvantages listed above. The key is insure that you have one person running the show. While we can discuss which person will make the best pitch leader, typically a committee will have all of the disadvantages listed above without any of the strengths. This is not to say that a committee can’t work, but you will make the process more difficult and painful than it needs to be.
Mark Schnurman
Pitch Consultant
www.filamentinc.com
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Rehearsal tips for nervous presenters
Rehearsal tips for nervous presenters
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Who Presented vs Who Sold at SXSW
The following is a blog from Luke Sullivan, CD at GSD&M and author of Hey Whipple, Squeeze This. Luke does a great job of discussing the need for selling ideas as opposed to simply presenting ideas.
To read his blog directly, go to www.heywhipple.com
Here is the cut and pasted version...
The ideas that were actually selling here at SxSW were the ones that were actually sold – by a fantastic speaker.
Now I agree, some ideas are so great they don’t need to be sold. For example, they day they discover a cure for cancer? They won’t need an ad agency. They can take out a classified ad in the Tulsa Weekly-Bugle and the world will know about it within a week. But for those of us with ideas less world-shaking, we will need to sell them.
Fact is, most of the presentations I saw this week kinda blew. The content was great, no question. Pretty much every presenter had something cool to say. (With one exception; one speaker was so 1998 she was puttin’ up slides about how “Consumers can now scan bar codes with their phones!” Dude. Please.)
The big difference in the transmission of ideas comes down to this: Passion. Power. Clarity. Energy.
I don’t care if you’re just on a stinkin’ panel about banner ads, when you have the mike you’ve been given the gift of the attention of 200 people and you’re failing if you do not knock it out with passion, power, clarity and energy. Of the sessions I attended, every single speaker failed. I know, I know, they weren’t all that way. In fact, at last night’s party at GSDM, most people were talking about Gary Vaynerchuk‘s speech. People were blown away by it. Blown away. Damn, I wish I’d seen it. I didn’t, but I heard about it. And you know what? Even if it turns out his speech was content I’m not really interested in, I woulda ended up interested in it because he made me interested.
President Bill Clinton came to speak here at the agency a couple a times (he’s best friends with Roy Spence, himself a legendary speaker). I remember watching Clinton that day and just soakin’ it in, trying to learn everything I could; his intensity; his command of the material; his pacing; his eye contact; his comfort in front of people; his accessibility. It was the full package and, man, it was mesmerizing.
So, if you agree we’re in the business of spreading ideas, of selling ideas, make it your business to learn how to speak publicly. To learn how to put on a kick-ass presentation.
TWO FINAL NOTES:
My friend here at GSDM, Jenn Totten, she told me to CTFD. (Calm The Fuck Down, a hip abbreviation I predict will soon to be in the national lexicon.): “You are cranky, but you’re right. The panels were the worst. They all winged it. But I found the solo speakers to be pretty good across the board.” Another agency friend, Lauren Walker, agreed with Jenn. “The solo presenters were great. The panels were ‘eh’ and the discussions just tanked. There were certainly a lot of interesting topics to discuss but moderating a discussion is a fine art. It requires tact and a large knowledge base. Most of the discussions I attended were steered in one direction early on and stayed there. Next time, no discussions for me.”
Dang, I wished I’d been in those cool solo presentations. (BTW, folks. SXSW is very good about listening to feedback, so fill out those survey thingies.)
Final note: I really liked these “Ogilvy Notes” things I saw here and there. I wonder if my own agency oughta do something like this? Maybe have our own artists make big-ass drawings this cool, for those presentations we have to make more than once – like, say, agency themes, case histories, stuff like that. These boards are more interesting, more playful and informal than stupid Powerpoint slides.
------------------------------------------
Thanks for a great blog Luke!
Mark Schnurman
Filament Inc.
Pitch Consultant
Twitter: @markschnurman
To read his blog directly, go to www.heywhipple.com
Here is the cut and pasted version...
The ideas that were actually selling here at SxSW were the ones that were actually sold – by a fantastic speaker.
Now I agree, some ideas are so great they don’t need to be sold. For example, they day they discover a cure for cancer? They won’t need an ad agency. They can take out a classified ad in the Tulsa Weekly-Bugle and the world will know about it within a week. But for those of us with ideas less world-shaking, we will need to sell them.
Fact is, most of the presentations I saw this week kinda blew. The content was great, no question. Pretty much every presenter had something cool to say. (With one exception; one speaker was so 1998 she was puttin’ up slides about how “Consumers can now scan bar codes with their phones!” Dude. Please.)
The big difference in the transmission of ideas comes down to this: Passion. Power. Clarity. Energy.
I don’t care if you’re just on a stinkin’ panel about banner ads, when you have the mike you’ve been given the gift of the attention of 200 people and you’re failing if you do not knock it out with passion, power, clarity and energy. Of the sessions I attended, every single speaker failed. I know, I know, they weren’t all that way. In fact, at last night’s party at GSDM, most people were talking about Gary Vaynerchuk‘s speech. People were blown away by it. Blown away. Damn, I wish I’d seen it. I didn’t, but I heard about it. And you know what? Even if it turns out his speech was content I’m not really interested in, I woulda ended up interested in it because he made me interested.
President Bill Clinton came to speak here at the agency a couple a times (he’s best friends with Roy Spence, himself a legendary speaker). I remember watching Clinton that day and just soakin’ it in, trying to learn everything I could; his intensity; his command of the material; his pacing; his eye contact; his comfort in front of people; his accessibility. It was the full package and, man, it was mesmerizing.
So, if you agree we’re in the business of spreading ideas, of selling ideas, make it your business to learn how to speak publicly. To learn how to put on a kick-ass presentation.
TWO FINAL NOTES:
My friend here at GSDM, Jenn Totten, she told me to CTFD. (Calm The Fuck Down, a hip abbreviation I predict will soon to be in the national lexicon.): “You are cranky, but you’re right. The panels were the worst. They all winged it. But I found the solo speakers to be pretty good across the board.” Another agency friend, Lauren Walker, agreed with Jenn. “The solo presenters were great. The panels were ‘eh’ and the discussions just tanked. There were certainly a lot of interesting topics to discuss but moderating a discussion is a fine art. It requires tact and a large knowledge base. Most of the discussions I attended were steered in one direction early on and stayed there. Next time, no discussions for me.”
Dang, I wished I’d been in those cool solo presentations. (BTW, folks. SXSW is very good about listening to feedback, so fill out those survey thingies.)
Final note: I really liked these “Ogilvy Notes” things I saw here and there. I wonder if my own agency oughta do something like this? Maybe have our own artists make big-ass drawings this cool, for those presentations we have to make more than once – like, say, agency themes, case histories, stuff like that. These boards are more interesting, more playful and informal than stupid Powerpoint slides.
------------------------------------------
Thanks for a great blog Luke!
Mark Schnurman
Filament Inc.
Pitch Consultant
Twitter: @markschnurman
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Tips for Nervous Presenters
The following is a blog written by my partner Pam who is fantastic at working with nervous presenters.
She will be adding different tips with each new blog entry.
http://tipsfornervouspresenters.blogspot.com/2010/11/common-misconceptions-about-handling.html
Mark Schnurman
Pitch Consultant
http:www.filamentinc.com
She will be adding different tips with each new blog entry.
http://tipsfornervouspresenters.blogspot.com/2010/11/common-misconceptions-about-handling.html
Mark Schnurman
Pitch Consultant
http:www.filamentinc.com
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
How many people should attend a pitch?
A recent blog question posed to me was how many people should attend a pitch. Based on the question, I am assuming it came from a small to mid-sized agency and the piece of business in questions is not a huge, multi-national assignment with multiple partners. For typical pitches facing small to mid-sized agencies, there are a few general guidelines that I tend to recommend when considering the size of the pitch team.
First, do not overwhelm the client. If there only going to be two or three people representing the client side, do everything that you can in order to keep your pitch team as small as possible. This does not mean that you need to bring only two or three people, but it does mean that you should not bring 10 people.
Second, everyone on the agency team gets a speaking part. Bringing a junior person that does not have a speaking role so that the client can “meet the team” does not count. Clients want to get to know the person and see if they are a good fit, not simply put a name to a face. If you send a person to the pitch but do not give that person a speaking part, the client can get the impression that you do not trust junior staff. The advantage of letting a junior person have a role in the presentation is that the bar is set lower for the day-to-day person. You may find that with a lower bar, the day-to-day person will sail over it and wow the client.
Third, it is good to bring at least one day-to-day person. Clients can only assume the worst if the agency is not willing to bring any day-to-day staff to a meeting. This is not to suggest loading up the entire team with more junior staff, but bringing a day-to-day account or creative person is probably a good idea.
Given those three guidelines, there are seven key roles to be played on a typical pitch team.
The role of the executive – a CEO, president, managing director, etc. – is to open and close the meeting and discuss the agency. He or she should not talk about the specifics of the client’s work unless the executive is going to be working on the account. Another role of the executive in the room is to field questions and distribute them to the team. If the executive answers every question it can appear that the team isn’t trusted to answer the questions. Artfully moving the questions to the appropriate team member can help to promote team chemistry.
The planner/high level account person will talk about strategy. Depending on the resources of the agency, this could be a planner, director of account services, or a high level account person.
The day-to-day account person is not necessarily 100% assigned to the account. This person is simply the primary point of contact for the client, usually somewhere between 50% and 100% billable. This person will typically discuss tactical executions and how the strategy will be implemented.
It is great if everyone can speak to digital, but typically this requires special expertise. The advantage of bring the digital person is that you have that extra level of expertise. The disadvantage is that digital can look like a separate department instead of one, unified creative team.
Creative staff is typically one high level and one day-to-day staffer. The higher level creative staff can outline the challenges that the creative assignment presented and set up the first concept. The day-to-day creative can then present some concepts. It is a good idea to have the creative director come back and summarize all of the different concepts that were shown.
Some pitches do not include Media, but even then it is still useful to have someone that can serve as the bridge between the agency and the media buying firm. The absence of this role can leave some gaps in the pitch. We have all seen the role of media change over the last five or so year. Media truly is the new creative. With that new role, comes new responsibilities. In the old days, the media section was what done when everyone else was finished with their presentation. Now, the media section may be asked to carry a pitch. Presentation and storytelling skills which were never stressed in a media department are now very important and can make or break pitch.
The pitch is the client’s opportunity to get to know everyone on the team, so remember to give everyone a substantive role. This does not mean that the role needs to be complex. It does mean that each presenter needs to have enough time to connect with the audience and enough time to establish him or herself as an important member of the team. While team size is probably not going to make your team win or lose the pitch, team chemistry can, and the larger the team, the more difficult it is to show chemistry.
Mark Schnurman
www.filamentinc.com
Pitch Consultant
First, do not overwhelm the client. If there only going to be two or three people representing the client side, do everything that you can in order to keep your pitch team as small as possible. This does not mean that you need to bring only two or three people, but it does mean that you should not bring 10 people.
Second, everyone on the agency team gets a speaking part. Bringing a junior person that does not have a speaking role so that the client can “meet the team” does not count. Clients want to get to know the person and see if they are a good fit, not simply put a name to a face. If you send a person to the pitch but do not give that person a speaking part, the client can get the impression that you do not trust junior staff. The advantage of letting a junior person have a role in the presentation is that the bar is set lower for the day-to-day person. You may find that with a lower bar, the day-to-day person will sail over it and wow the client.
Third, it is good to bring at least one day-to-day person. Clients can only assume the worst if the agency is not willing to bring any day-to-day staff to a meeting. This is not to suggest loading up the entire team with more junior staff, but bringing a day-to-day account or creative person is probably a good idea.
Given those three guidelines, there are seven key roles to be played on a typical pitch team.
The role of the executive – a CEO, president, managing director, etc. – is to open and close the meeting and discuss the agency. He or she should not talk about the specifics of the client’s work unless the executive is going to be working on the account. Another role of the executive in the room is to field questions and distribute them to the team. If the executive answers every question it can appear that the team isn’t trusted to answer the questions. Artfully moving the questions to the appropriate team member can help to promote team chemistry.
The planner/high level account person will talk about strategy. Depending on the resources of the agency, this could be a planner, director of account services, or a high level account person.
The day-to-day account person is not necessarily 100% assigned to the account. This person is simply the primary point of contact for the client, usually somewhere between 50% and 100% billable. This person will typically discuss tactical executions and how the strategy will be implemented.
It is great if everyone can speak to digital, but typically this requires special expertise. The advantage of bring the digital person is that you have that extra level of expertise. The disadvantage is that digital can look like a separate department instead of one, unified creative team.
Creative staff is typically one high level and one day-to-day staffer. The higher level creative staff can outline the challenges that the creative assignment presented and set up the first concept. The day-to-day creative can then present some concepts. It is a good idea to have the creative director come back and summarize all of the different concepts that were shown.
Some pitches do not include Media, but even then it is still useful to have someone that can serve as the bridge between the agency and the media buying firm. The absence of this role can leave some gaps in the pitch. We have all seen the role of media change over the last five or so year. Media truly is the new creative. With that new role, comes new responsibilities. In the old days, the media section was what done when everyone else was finished with their presentation. Now, the media section may be asked to carry a pitch. Presentation and storytelling skills which were never stressed in a media department are now very important and can make or break pitch.
The pitch is the client’s opportunity to get to know everyone on the team, so remember to give everyone a substantive role. This does not mean that the role needs to be complex. It does mean that each presenter needs to have enough time to connect with the audience and enough time to establish him or herself as an important member of the team. While team size is probably not going to make your team win or lose the pitch, team chemistry can, and the larger the team, the more difficult it is to show chemistry.
Mark Schnurman
www.filamentinc.com
Pitch Consultant
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
