It’s no secret that the marketing and advertising world is a mess. The economy is rotten, and consumers can't stop trading one favorite entertainment medium for another.

Somehow, agencies are staying ahead of the curve. Their bottom lines may not be resilient to change, but their ability to adapt and produce seems undiminished. To find out why, I decided to examine how agencies are taking projects from pitch to launch.

Unfortunately, it’s not an area where you can easily get a straight answer. Every agency has an elevator pitch about its workflow that bears scant resemblance to reality. So, instead of conducting formal interviews with CEOs, I spoke off record with a handful of people from different sides of the industry.

These conversations revealed an interesting idea. While all agencies claim a unique creative process, most are using one of two methodologies (or a mix of both). The first is a tried-and-true formula that’s been around for more than 50 years. The second is a new way of working. For the lack of a better word, let's call it the Big Table.

THE BIG TABLE
To understand the Big Table, it’s best to start with the traditional advertising process. The CliffsNotes version concentrates the creative function in a two-person team composed of an art director and a copywriter. Their task is to sift through research materials and distill their findings into a brilliant creative idea. Then, they go out and find talent to bring that idea to life.

“My partner and I work to develop ideas,” one such art director told me last year. “Then I see them through the completion of the design, while he oversees the message.”

This model rests on the belief that creative ideas are independent from production. Copywriters and art directors are not required to have an intimate understanding of how work is produced. They come up with a terrific concept (at least that’s the idea), and rely on others to transform that inspiration into commercials, advertisements and Web sites. Of course, this process is not monolithic; there are as many permutations of it as there are agencies. But the belief in the separation of ideas and production remains essential, and it provides a striking contrast with the Big Table.

Big Table agencies firmly reject idealism. They believe that media is evolving so quickly that it’s impossible for a copywriter and art director to know every way that ideas can be deployed. In their view, these two are arrogant, out-of-touch dinosaurs who chisel their ideas in granite before transmitting them to the world.

“In the old days, there were two, three or four media channels you had at your disposal,” the CEO of a new advertising agency told me last fall. “Nowadays there are thousands or millions of ways to reach your audience.” 

Big Table executives often speak in hyperbole, but there is a compelling logic to what they say. They argue that technology is so complex and fast-moving that agencies must take it into account at the beginning of the creative process. The only way to ensure that you have the best possible idea is to bring in creators and producers at the onset. To do this, you need a Big Table.

THE BIG TABLE AT WORK
The Big Table is a more democratic creative process than the traditional advertising model. Every time it receives a proposal, a representative from every discipline comes into one large and often chaotic room. The list of participants varies, but usually includes writers, designers, Flash coders, database programmers, creative directors and, sometimes, even the receptionists who greet clients on their way in the door.

The initial meeting is free-flowing. Almost anyone can make a proposal, and every idea is (theoretically) welcome, no matter what the source. Unlike the traditional model, the discussion goes beyond abstract concepts. The participants also comment on the direction an idea can be taken, propose media applications for it, and assess its potential cost in time and materials. The end result is not an idea, but a technical and creative plan that the Big Table believes it can execute.

If the pitch is successful, everyone goes back to their day jobs. They write taglines, manipulate images in Photoshop, code ActionScript, design outdoor boards and do whatever else is required. Periodically, they return to the Big Table, where they present their progress and take feedback from the rest of the team. This fluid and responsive workflow enables them to adapt quickly if their initial technical ideas turn out to be too ambitious.

For example, during a project I observed last year, a team decided to create an interactive mystery, using a Flash viewer that allowed for close-up examination of evidence. The viewer wasn’t complicated, but other technical problems took up too much time, so it eventually had to be dropped. Because the other members of the team were aware of the coding struggles, they were well prepared to adapt scripts and develop new ideas to ensure that the project was a success.

BIG TABLES, GOOD AND BAD
Big Table agencies are usually associated with youth and consumer marketing. Their campaigns often combine YouTube videos, online games, forum seeding and wild postings. They also claim great success with social media and application development.

“The things we build aren’t what an art director and copywriter can dream up,” a Big Table creative director told me (humility is not a strong suit). “They wouldn't know that it was possible.”

At its most aggressive, the Big Table sees itself as redefining the promotional landscape and putting hidebound advertising agencies in the shade. Their record, however, is not one of universal success; nor is work of more traditional agencies demonstrably inferior. Big Tables have produced spectacular and daring projects, many of which have viral reach that multiplies their ROI. But for every success, there are campaigns that also fall horribly flat.

The reasons behind this are complex and partly historical. Many Big Table agencies were originally production firms employed by ad agencies, and they remain uncomfortable with strategic messaging. They often lack true copywriters. Instead, they prefer visual ideas, or they outsource messaging to other talent. Such agencies have been known to turn part of the creative burden over to other artists, who create whatever they want. A similar strategy involves Web 2.0 solutions, where customers do most of the talking.

“They sometimes just don't get that we have a message and we have to get it across,” a frustrated marketing manager told me last summer.

NEXT STEPS
My description of the Big Table has been a little exaggerated. Few firms, if any, operate entirely in this way. Many agencies today are experimenting with hybrid structures that preserve the art director and copywriter roles, but place them in creative collaboration with development teams. Big Table firms are also recruiting strategists and copywriters to help with messaging and idea generation.

In other words, the Big Table is not an all or nothing proposition. It’s a new construct that many agencies are weighing against their workflows. One thing should give them pause, however. Young creatives today seem to be more open to collaboration than the brilliant-geniuses-on-a-mountaintop of years past. Even if copywriters and art directors become fluent enough in the new technologies to ignore production staff again, this new generation may prefer Big Tables anyway.

For now, however, let’s let the Big Table bombast fly and see where it lands. It’s a heck of a lot more fun than watching the economy tank, taking this industry along with it. CA