Award certificate idea

VISUALIZETHIS SCENARIO -- assuming you haven't already.

Have you ever visited an advertising agency, direct response consultancy or major direct marketer that doesn't have a shelf loaded with awards in the reception room? And all you have is a Certificate of Appreciation from some local charity for which you whipped up a pro bono ad.

You poor puddy-tat! Relief is probably as close as an entry in one of the many awards programs to be picked over by practitioners of our craft.

Have you noticed three peculiar procedures that really don't make a lot of sense in our award-happy environment? (I'll save the most attackable one for last.)

The first peculiar procedure is the ability of entrants to file an entry of the same piece in two, three or even half a dozen categories. It's called shortening the odds," but on a pure judgmental level the practice is neither logical nor reasonable. We see the same ad or mailing or brochure or broadcast commercial winning an award in multiple categories. What that means is the company or agency is shotgunning rather than taking its best shot.

The second peculiar procedure is acceptance of entries that seem to come from outer space. A local DM club will have an awards competition. Here are entries from distant sources, for distant marketers. Why are these entries accepted? Because the entry fees represent a revenue source, and entry fees keep the awards programs humming.

The third procedure is one that's out of key with the entire process of distributing awards. It's divorcing the judging from the ultimate gauge of a marketing vehicle's effectiveness--results.

So we have awards bestowed on cosmetic grounds. That would be mildly (but not totally) appropriate if these were art directors' awards. They aren't. They're awards for the totality of the entry. But they're judged as art, because that's both the experiential background of the judges or because "the way it looks" is the easiest litmus test or because the person or company who submits the entry has clout.

Obviously, even though many of the entry forms ask what the response was, the judges have no way of validating nor verifying extravagant claims of success that accompany an entry: "Pulled 78 percent above expectations." Yeah, sure. We never heard that one before, so we have awards given to companies whose entries were so effective the company itself has gone into Chapter 11 or closed its doors entirely.

What to do? One mini-solution would be to have the claim of results verified by a second party. If an agency submitted an entry, the claim of gigantic response would be established as genuine by a countersignature from the client. If a company submitted an entry, the claim of gigantic response would carry the signatures of two corporate officers.

Too drastic, you say? It would reduce entries to a zilch-level, you say? Well, maybe. Or maybe it would increase the number of entries because those ads and mailers and Web sites and broadcast commercials that didn't glorify production over results would realize they now have a chance to win...and they'd enter...and their reception rooms could have a plaque to display.

At least our little world of direct response doesn't face the major scams that have infected such major-league competitions as the Cannes International Advertising Festival, in which giant ad agencies are accused--with some evidence to back up the accusations--of inventing, designing and entering ads that never ran. Can you believe it? These guys put together phony ads just to win an award.

Let's follow that to the next conclusion: Why would they do that? Why would they go to the trouble, or, more significantly; the expense, of creating an ad just to win an award? Why didn't they enter an ad that actually ran?

Do you see the hypocrisy here? An ad that actually had message and guts was bypassed in favor of an ad the agency or client felt wasn't strong enough to compete in the open marketplace...but was strong enough to enter in an awards competition.

We've known for three-quarters of a century to look askance at awards. The Academy Awards are as much for popularity as they are for talent. Or they may be given out of guilt for having bypassed an actor or director for years.

With the plethora of awards floating around today; there's no reason any agency with shelf space can't have a plaque or a statuette gracing the shelf. On the other hand, there's no reason for others to view that token in awe. What we should view in awe is verified proof that the creative talent and marketing expertise the display represents resulted in greater response.

The most insidious aspect of awarding awards is the attitudinal impact on young "creatives" joining our ranks. We're teaching them that salesmanship is secondary to flash, that product presentation is secondary to outeness, that a copy-heavy ad doesn't have a chance to win an award, that straightforward "sell" is considered unimaginative, and that if they want to get somewhere in this business they'd better follow the Yellow Brass Road.

There's nothing heathenish nor crass in constructing marketing messages whose purpose, beginning to end, is to get the phone or cash register to ring. There's everything heathenish and crass in dishing out awards because the judges "like the way it looks"... admire the extent of production... or succumb to the unholy cult of cleverness-for-the-sake-of-cleverness.

That's my award-winning idea. Just be sure to inscribe my name on the plaque, big enough so visitors can read it when standing six feet away from the bathroom shelf.

* HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS is the principal of Lewis Enterprises in Fort Lauderdale. FL He consults with and writes direct response copy for clients worldwide. His 25th book "Marketing Meyhem" was just published by Racom Books. His 26th "E-mail Marketing" is on Amacom's sprint list.