I have an award that I received from another agency where I previously worked. It’s called “The Breakthrough Award for Intrusive Creative”. This agency gave internal awards every year to its employees (that they called “associates” by the way - “employee” was a bad word because it implied a traditional, pyramid-style operating model which was counter to this agency’s peer-level structure centered around self-guided, client-based teams). This annual award was the highest honor they bestowed on someone in the creative category. It wasn’t given to me for any one particular thing I had created, but rather as recognition for consistently creative work throughout the year. It was a big deal to get it, and it made me feel great at the time. Sure, I mean, who doesn’t like winning awards?  

The name of the award, particularly the meaning of the word “intrusive”, has always been intriguing to me. Many people have a negative perception of advertising in general, mostly because too often it is presented in a way that creates an unwelcome intrusion on consumer’s lives. The Digital Video Recorder (DVR) phenomenon pretty well confirms this fact. Sure, it’s great to be able to easily record your favorite TV shows, but it seems that the DVR’s ability to fast-forward through commercials was the “killer app” that generated so much interest in this product. 

I looked up the meaning of the word intrusive. The dictionary defined it as “making an unwelcome manifestation with disruptive or adverse effect.” That doesn’t exactly sound like what we’re after as advertising professionals. The word “disruptive” in the definition is interesting also. I think that is what my former agency meant by “intrusive creative” because you hear the term “disruptive” being used a lot in the advertising industry. The inference is to shake things up, to wake people from their glazed state of indifference and pay attention to what you’re trying to tell them (Hey! Wake up! Buy this salty, crispy snack food damnit!). 

A little while back, I was pursuing a director position at TEQUILA\, TBWA\Chiat\Day’s interactive arm. It was a long, drawn out process, (13 interviews in all!) that didn’t end up producing a job for me, but during that time I got a peek into some of the shop’s inner workings. One of the things I discovered is that they called their initial discovery/account planning sessions with clients “Disruption Workshops”. In fact, the concept of disruption came up a lot in those 13 interviews - the notion of startling people into thinking a different way, paying attention, waking up, opening their eyes and becoming enlightened in some way. At the time I remember thinking how cool that sounded. This was really a great group of people that did exceptional work. Without a doubt I would have loved to spend some time there. But as time has passed, I’ve reflected on this concept of disruption and how it is a central theme in many creative professional’s approach to solving advertising problems. Something about it bothers me. Why should we need to disrupt people’s lives to get them to become aware of a brand, try it out and eventually become loyal advocates? It’s weird and not very natural. Imagine your friends hiding around corners, jumping out and scaring you every time they wanted you to know about something cool. That’s just not how people act naturally. (I’m not speaking about my friends - they would do something like that - but hopefully you choose your company more wisely than I!) Anyway, the point is, people are annoyed by intrusions and disruptions in their life. Do you know anyone who likes the fact that the volume on their TV sets multiplies noticeably when commercials come on? Sometimes it’s so pronounced that people scramble to find their TV remotes so they can mute the damn thing - it’s that unbearable. Or being constantly barraged with advertising messages everywhere they go. Out-of-home advertising has become ubiquitous. Breaking far beyond the boundaries of traditional billboards, bus stops and taxi cabs, ads have found their way into the nooks and crannies of people’s environment, appearing in less and less expected places, steadily encroaching on their personal space. Stairs, floors, video displays at the gas pump, etc., all with the aim to disrupt people in the midst of their daily routines, and get in front of them with their message. Does it work? Sure, there’s numbers to support the fact that it does. Are people annoyed by it? Um, yeah. Ask anyone.

So what if the thinking changed? What if, disruption wasn’t as important to advertising professionals as relevance when attempting to build brands? There’s a gradual shift happening that I hope continues. The newest and best brand building initiatives, in my opinion, involve the development of useful, value-added services, often free-of-charge, that promote the lifestyle associated with the brand. The Nike+ website is a great example. There you can upload your running data from your iPod to the site, track your performance against goals you’ve set for yourself, you can get professional coaching, compete with your friends, and all kinds of great services relevant to your interest in running. Is this still a shoe company? I’m sure it seems like more than that to it’s loyal users. Brand experiences like these become such a natural fit with people’s lives, that they don’t feel like they are being marketed to. 

Consumers have come to expect superior value and I believe that people’s perception of what superior value means is evolving. It could be that the only way to stay competitive in the future will be to really consider what’s important to your customers and innovate valuable services that promote the lifestyle or activity associated with your brand. So much so, that your brand becomes a natural fit with your customer’s behavior and interests.