Account Planning: Current Agency Perspectives on an Advertising Enigma
Chris Hackley (Christopher E Hackley), Royal Holloway University of London
Pre-print copy. Please cite as
Hackley, C. (2003) ‘Account planning: current agency perspectives on an advertising enigma’, Journal of Advertising Research 43/2, 235-246.
Abstract
The account planning "philosophy" of creative advertising development has beenhyped on both sides of the Atlantic for more than 30 years yet there is still littleagreement on what exactly it is and what contribution it has made. This articlereviews current perspectives on the account planning discipline from the London andNew York agencies that pioneered the discipline. Depth interviews suggested thataccount planning remains a powerful idea for advertising professionals and a majorpriority for top international agencies. The complexity and depth of feeling thatsurrounds the topic, however, is striking. Views range from passionate advocacy to open cynicism. This article offers an interpretation of the major issues that emergedand integrates this with research perspectives to suggest an agenda for the widerunderstanding and successful implementation of account planning.
Introduction
To non-advertising people it may be hard to imagine why an arcane advertising managementphilosophy can generate heated and often angry disagreement more than 30 years after its inception.Yet the "philosophy" of account planningdoes exactly this. The label "account planning"normally refers to a strategic role within agencyaccount teams and also, more broadly, to a "philosophy"of advertising development. Put simply,the role involves distilling insights from researchand integrating them into the creative developmentof advertising and brand communicationsstrategies (Meyers, 1986; West and Ford, 2001).The account planner is known as the "voice of theconsumer" (Pollitt, 1979) within the account teamand is the expert at interpreting qualitative consumerresearch data. The account planning philosophyinvolves instilling an ethos of advertisingeffectiveness founded on consumer insightsthroughout the agency. As an "ethos," accountplanning is more than a creative technique. It isseen as a powerful way of distinguishing agenciesand generating new business (Jay Chiat, quoted
in Steel, 1998).
However, putting account planning "simply" isa dangerous business. For the converted, account
planners are the "thinking beginning and end ofthe communications process . . ." (Account Planner,London). Planning is a "discipline . .. thatadds value .. . helps to raise the caliber of the
work . . ." and " . . . was respected from the momentit was adopted within the agency . . ." (SeniorAccount Planner, New York). In contrast, forthe unconverted, account planning is an "elaboratecharade" (Kendrick and Dee, 1992). Accountplanners are the "empty suits" (Anon) who danceonstage to "to entertain clients . . . a lot of veryinteresting points of view are offered then advertisingis created by a creative director who's innone of these meetings" (Account Planner, NewYork).
There are those within the industry (such asJohn Bartle of Bartle Bogle Hegarty) who, it is
reported, claim that the "great" ideas of creativespecialists are far more important to effective anddistinctive advertising than the consumer insightsof account planners (West and Ford, 2001). Withinagencies such disagreements can get personal: theword "hate" occurred more than once ininterviews with planners in connectionwith their standing in the agency. Some
planners felt that daily working life was a running battle with account executives who
excluded the planner from strategic decisionsand referred to them for trivial questions
such as " . . . what colour clothes theactor should wear in a commercial ..."(Junior Account Planner, UK). Clearly, thereis a point of view in the industry that is,to say the least, sceptical toward the claimsmade for account planning and the value
of account planners.
In interviews the "official" agency positionon account planning was not alwaysreflected in the "unofficial" commentsof agency professionals. It seems that accountplanning can generate tensions thatplace the priorities of senior agency managementat odds with the working practices
and politics of account teams. Topmanagement may be attracted by the valuesand differentiation they feel accountplanning builds into their agency brand.However, saying the words is one thing;getting account teams to do the deeds isanother. Several planners commented thatthey were not necessarily respected inprevious or current jobs. One New York
planner lamented that " . . . I've only seena couple of people practice planning in away in which you can actually see theresults in the advertising." It appearedthat even in agencies that claim to practicean account planning approach implementationcan be a major difficulty.
The contrast between the public andprivate face of account planning emergedas interviews became more candid undergentle questioning, in some cases withthe audio recorder switched off. In onecase the author was ushered into a privateroom out of earshot of the rest of thefloor. All work places require some discretionand none are without conflict, butit was clear that account planning can bea sensitive subject within agencies. Theself-surveillance advertising professionalsexercised over their comments on accountplanning made it seem, at times, as muchlike an ideology as an ethos. The strikingand occasionally contradictory industryattitudes toward account planning seemindicative of a serious and complex issueof advertising agency management.The account planning story is well establishedin the advertising industry, muchlauded in some quarters, and equally reviledin others, but as recently as 1995one author suggested that "the jury is stillout" on account planning (Kover, Goldberg,and James, 1995, p. 64).
A New Yorkplanner explained that, while account planningwas well known and "well -accepted,"" . . . very little attention is given to planning. .. even after thirty years it's still
somewhat unknown." The advertising industryconducts courses on everything todo with communications, apart from accountplanning. Two New York plannersagreed that their agencies did not "reallytrain" planners. One agreed that agenciesdid not "really know what they were doing"on training for account planning.The lack of formal or established trainingprograms seems odd since senior accountplanners in large international agenciestalk of the complex skills that the accountplanning discipline demands. As the commentsbelow will reveal, an agreed curriculumfor planning seems unlikely giventhe diversity of views on the subject.This article will outline the samplingframe and the interview schedule usedbefore offering a brief account of the originand development of account planningin U.K. and U.S. advertising agencies. Itwill then integrate literature sources withinterview perspectives to outline the major
controversies and implementation problemsthat emerged. Finally, the article willattempt to distill the major themes andconclude with a suggested agenda for thesuccessful implementation of the accountplanning approach to creative advertisingdevelopment.
Sample frame and interview schedule
The sample frame was purposive: the authorbegan exploratory interviews in 1997at the London agencies that are moststrongly associated with the emergence ofaccount planning in the United Kingdom.The discipline was taken to New York inthe 1960s so in 2001 the author followed
the trail to conduct further interviews withsenior professionals in top Madison Avenueagencies. Eighteen account team professionalsin all roles (creative, accountplanning, and account management) wereinterviewed in the U.K. agencies while afurther four interviews with senior accountplanners were conducted in NewYork. Interviews were conducted in theLondon offices of four of the top five U.K.agencies (by billings) and in the NewYork offices of two agencies in the world'stop ten agency bands. Three were held atthe author's office in Oxford, United Kingdomand one in the Manchester U.K. officeof a major U.S. agency. All interviewees
were experienced professionals, three atboard level. Five of the account plannersinterviewed were either head or deputyhead of planning at their respective agency.Most interviews were audio recorded andfull transcripts made. Notes were madeon others. Some 40,000 words of transcriptionwere produced in all.
The exploratory nature of the study wasreflected in the relatively open interviewschedule. The depth interviews began withone question: "Could you tell me about your role and what it entails?" The principlefollowed in the interviews was to try to attain a relatively informal rapportwith interviewees so that they felt able tobe relaxed and expansive. Supplementary
questions were added throughout theinterviews to probe answers and to elicitexamples of the contribution the personmade to recent campaigns. The broad aimwas to generate insights into managementof the creative advertising developmentprocess from the experiential perspective
of account team professionals. It was immediatelyapparent that the interviewees'accounts of creative advertising developmentwere couched in the vocabulary andethos of account planning. In particular, interviewees'perspectives seemed framed bytheir respective agency's orientation to theaccount planning ethos. However, althoughthe topic came up repeatedly, references to
it were enigmatic and occasionally contradictory.
The interviews provided strong evidencethat account planning is consideredimportant enough to attract considerableresources and commitment from majoragencies. However, it was striking how littlesubstantive agreement there seemed tobe on what it is or how it should be done.
The U.K. interviews resulted in a Ph.D.thesis (Hackley, 1999), U.K. journal articles
(Hackley, 2000a, 2000b), and an AMAconference presentation (Hackley, 2000c).This article integrates the U.K. interviewfindings with the U.S. interviews and locatesthe resulting insights in a broaderliterature-derived exploration of publishedwork on account planning. One
final point needs to be made here shouldany of the foregoing quotes be interpreted
as negative in spirit. The authorfeels that interviewees were candid andopen and expressed sincere views thatreflected their commitment to their profession.The motivation for expressing theseviews was a desire on the part of theinterviewees to contribute to improvements
in advertising agency practice.
The origins of account planning
One account of the origin of account planningis that it began in the London officeof J. Walter Thompson (JWT) in 1968. Account planning seems to be a truly trans-Atlantic phenomenonin that it is owned neither by New York norLondon agencies but was developed by both.merged their marketing department withmedia and research and called it the "accountplanning" department (Feldwick,2000, p. xiii). Stephen King is often creditedwith this development (Crosier, Grant,and Gilmore, 2002). Predating this by threeyears, Stanley Pollitt at Boase MassimiPollitt in the United Kingdom developedan enhanced role for the researcher thattook account of changes in the market togenerate a closer identity with consumerproblems (Barry, Paterson, and Todd, 1987).Account planning was subsequently importedto New York by Jay Chiat of ChiatDay (Kendrick and Dee, 1992). Chiat Day'ssubsequent success alerted other agenciesto account planning.
Other commentators argue that the principlesof account planning pre-date theseinitiatives. Advertising luminaries David Ogilvy and Bill Bernbach employed principlesthat are recognizable in later accountplanning schemes. For Ogilvy thekey to effective advertising is simple: "Youdon't stand a tinker's chance of producingsuccessful advertising unless you startby doing your homework" (Ogilvy, 1985,p. 11). In his book Ogilvy offers numerousexamples to demonstrate that "homework" consists of understanding theproduct and the consumers and integratingthis understanding into creativedevelopment. In account planning thisprinciple translates to using researchthroughout the creative advertising developmentprocess as opposed to using researchto test ideas after creative workwas done.Account planning seems to be a trulytrans-Atlantic phenomenon in that it isowned neither by New York nor Londonagencies but was developed by both. Inthe United Kingdom, BMP DDB Needham,London, is widely regarded as the agencythat (still) holds the strongest account planningtradition. In the early days of accountplanning, U.S. agencies (notablyChiat Day in New York) tended to hireEnglish account planners. British accountplanners are still easy to find in NewYork but the discipline has become trulytransnational. The first American accountplanner (at Chiat Day) is still a senior planner in one of the major New Yorkagencies.
Implementation of account planningin the United States and theUnited Kingdom
Advocates of account planning argue thatit is well established and widely acceptedbut the little published research availablesuggests that its adoption is uneven. Accordingto one study of planning, themajority of major agencies in the UnitedStates reported that they did not have
account planners in 1992 (Weichselbaumand Kendrick, 1992). In the United Kingdom,the picture may be similar eventhough the United Kingdom is regard bymany professionals as having a strongeraccount planning tradition than the UnitedStates. The interviews suggested that topLondon agencies are more likely to claimthat they "do" account planning than regional
agencies. A regional study by Crosier,Grant, and Gilmore (2002) of accountplanning in Scottish advertising agenciesnotes that account planning departmentsare common in the large agencies inEdinburgh but not in Glasgow, which has a tradition of more retail-driven advertising.The establishment of account planningdepartments may be influenced thenby regional factors such as the size ofagencies and the type of accounts theytypically attract.
It must be noted that confusion still reignsregarding what planning is. Some agenciesargue that they do it and have alwaysdone so but they call it something else,"strategy" or "research." Others argue thatthe label "planner" is not meaningfully differentfrom "researcher." Several studieshave suggested, however, that many agenciesdo find it difficult or inconvenient toadopt account planning principles. One reasonsuggested was that account planningplaces emphasis on interpretation as opposedto collection of consumer data (Stewart,1987) and hence may challenge somewell-established features of traditionalagency practice. Many agencies traditionallypracticed research through a specializedresearcher role that serviced the accountteam. The researcher had no strategic responsibility.
It was largely the accountexecutive's job to interpret the researchfindings from the data and decide how orwhether these findings should be incorporatedinto strategic communications planning.Raising the researcher's profile tocreate a planning role may not be well received
either by creative staff, account executives,or even by researchers themselves.In principle, the account planning role mightbe seen as more demanding than that ofresearcher since it requires the researcher/planner to fully engage with the accountteam and to accept the managerial and politicaldemands that entails. In many agenciesthe researcher traditionally servicedaccount teams on the instructions of the accountexecutive. Servicing researchers werenot usually required to take an active partin decisions on advertising strategy or creativedevelopment.
Another study suggested that adoptionis resisted because of the emphasisaccount planning places on qualitativeunderstanding as opposed to black-andwhitestatistically supported facts. Linkedwith this is the suspicion in U.S. agenciesthat adoption of account planning creates an intellectual elite (Meyers, 1986).Account planners in both U.K. and U.S.agencies spoke of their role in "makingthe work better" and "adding value."Copywriters and account executivesoften question whether planners havethe skills to actually do this. In someagencies account planners are seen asthe "boffins" (a self-description) or eggheadsof the agency. This sense of having
intellectual skills as opposed to morepractical craft skills can generate cynicismfrom creative staff and accountexecutives. Some account plannersacknowledged that they can leave themselvesopen to this charge when membersof their profession fail to groundtheir reasoning in research or otherevidence. One planner admitted that" . . . a lot of planners unfortunately justread the brief and write the brief andthat's it. . . ." In contrast, this plannerclaimed that he lived with the productto "... find out everything about thecategory, the competition, consumers ...
I like to write the first ad, the badad...."Tied up with these issues is the role ofqualitative data analysis in account planning.Kendrick and Dee (1992, p. 202)suggest that many agencies are culturallyhostile to the qualitative research thatis central to the account planning role.
While most account planners claim to becomfortable with both quantitative andqualitative data analysis, the primacy ofqualitative analysis seems an importantpart of the account planning ethos. TheLondon agency BMP DDB Needham expressthis in their publicity material.Too often creative research does moreharm than good because . . . it looks ataggregated data instead of understandingindividuals, and it judges advertisementsagainst artificial and oftenirrelevant criteria. For these reasons weprefer the flexibility of qualitative research,which properly should be conductedby the account planner. Whenthis happens the findings can be fullyintegrated with all the other researchand thinking on the brand, and interpretedand actioned in ways which
creative people can use ...In-house publication,BMP DDB Needham, London.
Traditionally, account teams in U.S. agenciesare controlled by the account executivewho is the "gatekeeper." This was aview expressed by planners who had experienceof working in both countries.One said they (account executives) tendto "wield power" and "lead the process"and it is difficult for the planner not tofeel "disenfranchised." Another plannerwith New York experience explained thecultural distance between account executivesand planners by saying that accountexecutives (and clients) had the "WhartonMBAs and the $70,000 salaries while plannersare starting on $25,000 . . . becausewe don't pay out for brains." It is wellknown that top U.S. business schools havea strong quantitative tradition in their curriculum.It is therefore possible that accountexecutives are less comfortable withthe qualitative emphasis of account planning.There is no reason to suppose thatthis general tendency is any different inthe United Kingdom, although many ofthe U.K. account executives interviewedhad a liberal arts educational background.Part of the reason for the lack of consensusabout account planning within theindustry is that the term has acquired amuch broader meaning since its inception. From being the "voice of the consumerwithin the agency," account plannersnow (often under the generic label of,simply, "planning") are charged with responsibilityfor strategic brand development.A senior account planner in a NewYork agency described this change: "...what's moved on is that when it startedeverybody talked about us being the voiceof the consumer and now the emphasisreally is on brands and branding andmaintaining brand value . . . planning is
evolving. . . ."
Are the London and New York traditionsreally different?
One American national working as a seniorplanner in a top London agency feltthat the role was conceived differently inthe United Kingdom and the United States."I have never worked in America but Iknow that it is very different primarilybecause the role of the advertising agency