TrinityP3 Blog

"Film is dead"

2008-08-26T09:50:30Z

So says Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, the writers and directors for Crank. Check out the comments on high definition digital video using the Red One camera by some of the world's leading film directors here So why do so many commercial film directors still insist on shooting on expensive and outdated film?

Advertiser’s Carbon Footprint equivalent to 380,000,000 cars!

2008-08-25T04:41:20Z

According to our calculations marketing communication globally is responsible for over 500 million tonnes of CO2-e per year and is forecast to grow by over 5 percent every year thereafter. To get this into some prospective, this is the equivalent amount CO2-e generated in the same period by over 380,000,000 average fuel-efficient cars. This is more than half the total number of cars on the road today! This figure is made up of $450 billion in media spend which equals approximately 162 million tonnes CO2-e a year plus the commercial print, direct marketing, design and production related activities; making up the balance. Carbon should be used as another measure when advertisers plan their media. This will not only reduce the advertisers’ emissions it will also send a message to the media channels and marketing suppliers to improve their footprint. And no, just shifting to on-line is not the simple answer. The internet, although very cost effective when using traditional media buying measures, has a big carbon footprint when not used in a targeted manner. That needs to be understood before leaping to the on-line solution.

Why do agencies cringe and marketers laugh when they are confronted with truth in advertising?

2008-08-24T10:36:00Z

Amazon. In this satirical take on the advertising process, the agency and client personnel say what they are thinking. If you have not seen it, it is well worth taking the time. But when we have played this video to an audience of advertising agency people and marketers, the agency people cringe and their clients laugh. Why?]]> The marketeer is portrayed as dithering, ineffective and pathetic. The agency is self centred, manipulative and arrogant. Neither side is portrayed in a positive light, but is is indicative of the shift in the power of the relationship from equal trusted partners in business to a master - slave, with the agency on the receiving end. Anyway, it is very funny and well observed. But why not show it to a mixed audience of marketeers and agencies and see if you see the same result.

Why service level agreements ( SLAs ) are not relevant to marketing services contracts

2008-08-24T07:21:43Z

Wikipedia says an SLA is a formally negotiated agreement between two parties. It is a contract that exists between customers and their service provider, client or between service providers. It records the common understanding about services, priorities, responsibilities, guarantee, and such — collectively, the level of service. For example, it may specify the levels of availability, serviceability, performance, operation, or other attributes of the service. SLAs were first introduced in the 1980s in the telecommunications industry, but are now wide spread throughout business. But in our experience, traditional SLA formats are not relevant in advertising and marketing, where the level of service delivery is directly influenced and impacted by the behaviour and actions of the buyer. In these circumstances, we recommend an engagement agreement, defining requirements of both parties.]]> Bozidar Spirovski recommends there are nine main criteria required to achieve at least a reasonable if not good SLA: 1. Any SLA is open for negotiation, but only in initial purchase 2. Define Availability as you would expect it 3. Always keep in mind the distinction between reaction time and correction 4. Make precise definitions of problem severity levels and tie them in with reaction and correction times 5. Define response time for all levels of severity 6. Define channels of communication and escalation 7. Define the conditions under which the SLA criteria are applied to a problem 8. Define measurements and reporting 9. Tie in penalties and contract back-out options The problem is that these about the buyer setting the level of service from the supplier. And were this is applied to marketing communications and especially advertising, usually by procurement, we see response times such as "must return calls within 2 hours" with a "99.9% compliance rate". Here is the question - "who is measuring all of the phone call response times between the client and the agency and what is the impact if the agency returns the call at 2 hours and 5 seconds?" I mean these type of SLA's are a joke. And what if the client does not return the call from the agency for 2 hours? I have seen hundreds of SLA's and KPI's (Key Performance Indicators) that are ridiculous and largely meaningless because they are irrelevant, unmeasurable and a waste of time and effort. Instead of SLA's, we encourage marketers to develop Engagement Agreements, which like SLA's records the common understanding about services, processes, priorities, responsibilities and expectations, but does so for both the buyer and the suppliers. Because the actions and behaviour of the buyer in this case, directly impact on the performance of the supplier.

Changing the name from P3 to TrinityP3

2008-08-20T02:53:03Z

On July 1 this year we announced the change in name of the company I started eight and a half years ago from P3 to TrinityP3. The reaction and comments have been incredibly positive, but the number one question is "why?" Why did we feel compelled to change the brand name that we had spent eight years in time, effort and money developing? The pragmatic answer is, "To avoid the confusion with our competitors in Asia who have a very similar name to ours". The more significant answer is "Why not?" P3 has developed significantly since its inception and grown in size, from a one person operation to now more than sixteen industry consultants in Australia and New Zealand and now five people in Asia. P3 stands for PEOPLE, PURPOSE and PROCCESS. Helping people achieve commercial purpose through creative process. This line was on our business cards, website and almost all of our publications. In the earliest days of the company it meant we would help advertisers understand and benchmark their production costs in television and then print. In fact for the first three years production assessments represented 90% of our revenue. Today, production assessments now represent less than 10% of our revenue, because the other areas of our business have grown significantly. Roster rationalisation, remuneration, search and selection, media planning and buying benchmarking, PBR, contracts and negotiations are now the bulk of our business. We are performing a more strategic, rather than tactical, role for our clients. So why Trinity? In this strategic role, we think of our relationship as a trinity between the advertiser/marketeer and their suppliers. The marketeer is the Father, the suppliers the Son and we are the Holy Spirit that moves through and around that relationship strengthening and improving it. Of course, some people may object to the use of the commercial use of the Holy Trinity, and if they are offended, as a Christian, I apologise. But it seemed to me that the strength of the relationship of three is fundamental to human history and the addition of this third part to the trinity is core to our offering to the marketing communications category. That is why we are NOT cost consultants, or pitch consultants, of procurement consultants, or any of the other labels we have been given in the past. TrinityP3 is a marketing management consultancy. While marketeers focus on developing the marketing strategies and executions to deliver their business objectives (EFFECTIVENESS). We assist marketeers manage the marketing process so deliver the resources and services to them in the most cost and time effective way possible (EFFICIENCY).

Film versus digital video - the war is over and film is dead

2008-07-24T04:50:29Z

For all those production companies and agency creative people who still insist on shooting 35 mm film or 16 mm film instead of high definition digital video, this latest posting on YouTube from AH Films puts another nail in your coffin. Holding on to out-dated practices long after the rest of the industry moves on is not innovative, is not leading edge and is not creative.

Big Brother's shrinking carbon footprint from it's rating demise.

2008-07-19T03:51:40Z

As the station bosses worried themselves, then the show into an early grave, there is some good news. Big Brother was contributing over 1.5 tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere for each 30 seconds of viewing during the peak of the latest series. This national audience was very attractive to any would be advertiser wishing to promote their goods and services during the show. Unfortunately as the shows popularly waned so did the advertisers enthusiasm. As the ratings tumbled so did Big Brothers massive carbon footprint. He finally got his marching orders when during it's lowest ratings period it could only claim responsibility for just over half a tonne of carbon for each 30 second spot. So having failed to attract the necessary number of carbon eating plasma watching consumers he was finally laid to rest. Look on the bright side, the show was so boring that the carbon emissions were reduced by over a tonne! Let's just hope that all those viewers turned their TV's off and had a game of cards under their energy saving light bulbs.

The carbon impact of printing. A simple guide

2008-07-19T03:23:56Z

1. Paper. Manufacturing of paper stock is the biggest cause of carbon in the supply chain. It accounts for over 70% of the footprint in most printing processes. Reviewing your paper stock specifications to a lower carbon emitting paper is the quickest way to reduce your footprint. Do not be misled by the carbon neutral label. Ask about the energy source. 2. The printing process. ‘Carbon neutral’ does not mean you have a carbon efficient printer. The printing process with it’s electrically driven equipment accounts for another 10% of the carbon. And while it’s a smaller impact than paper, it is the one decision you can influence the most. Ask about audits, measurement and reduction strategies. 3. How your printer deals with it's waste will have approximately the same percentage impact as the printing process. Newspaper production produces about 10% of it’s emissions from the transport of waste and returns and collections. Commercial print does not have returns and collection but waste is still created if the product has a limited life-span. 4. Distribution of the printed item accounts for about 5% of the carbon. Distance and weight are the factors that affect this area. Review the feasibility of printing locally. 5. Transport of the paper to the printer and the carbon cost of ink production. Imported paper may have a lower carbon footprint but what did it cost in carbon to get it here? 6. Warehousing needs a re-think. Time in a warehouse will cost carbon. While traditional economics of print more and store, or print for pull distribution, were correct historically, in the Carbon Age, print on-demand needs to be looked at again. 7. Obsolescence. While no one sets out to print and destroy, it happens. And the cost has moved beyond the wasted money, the wasted carbon needs to be factored in as well. One approach is to review the re-print triggers to check whether the approval procedures for re-orders need changing. 8. If moving printing requirements offshore consider the carbon factor. Strike a more equitable balance between direct cost savings and increased carbon costs for transport. 9. Beware of the carbon neutral shingle hanging out front. Carbon neutral does not mean carbon efficient. Measured and continuous carbon reduction is what is required.

IT industry's carbon footprint equal to aviation's

2008-07-01T04:58:01Z

The lack of comment from the IT industry on the new Carbon Age has been suspicious in it's absence. And for good reason. Those good people at Carbon Trust in the UK have just announced a new programme to help companies understand the energy use within data centres. You can read the release for yourself below but it is interesting to note that the 2% of world wide energy consumption that is being used to power the IT industry is equivalent to aviation industry. So if you are a lover of carbon offsetting your interstate flights you may want to start considering planting a couple of trees after you have read this blog. Carbon Trust joins up with British Computer Society to cut carbon from data centres The Carbon Trust today announces a partnership with the British Computer Society (BCS) to develop a simulation software tool to help companies understand the energy use within data centres. The tool is being developed to address the IT industry’s need to manage growing power consumption and increased carbon emissions, which current forecasts compare to the level from the aviation industry. The project, funded by the Carbon Trust’s Low Carbon Collaboration initiative and Romonet, will focus on data centres as they contribute the largest single proportion of energy use and carbon emissions from the IT sector. Data centres account for a quarter of IT-related carbon emissions, which in turn make up 2% of the world’s total carbon emissions1. Romonet will produce the software, which is expected to be available in first quarter of 2009 and will be released through an open source license. Based on a model created by the BCS Data Centre specialist group the software tool will deliver outputs allowing operators to manage total costs of ownership, energy efficiency and ultimately carbon emissions (carbon footprint) on a per service or per application basis, an industry first in terms of carbon accountability. Using the software tool data centre owners and operators will be able to simulate the complex environment factoring both the mechanical and electrical infrastructure as well as housed IT equipment. Hugh Jones, Solutions Director at the Carbon Trust explains: “The scale of the problem is worrying. Forecasts based on the current growth of data and associated IT infrastructure translates into a picture of unsustainable power consumption in the long term and power supply capacity issues in the short term. It is crucial that we make effective tools available to enable companies to identify the right steps to take to reduce energy use and carbon.” Bob Harvey, chair of the BCS’s Carbon Footprint group says: “We’re delighted to be working with the Carbon Trust to address this important area to meet the increasing need for the IT industry to reduce its carbon emissions. For most companies, the data centre is the place to start, and with increasing energy costs and the threat of restricted power output to large data centres, there has never been a better time for businesses to reassess their energy usage. The Carbon Trust’s support helps to reinforce the message that the IT industry needs to address this issue now.” Liam Newcombe, Director of Research & Policy at Romonet says: “We believe this is a very positive step forward for our industry and shows commitment from two important industry bodies to help businesses understand and deal with the complexities of energy efficiency in their data centre. Romonet are happy to be engaged and supporting this activity.” Footnotes The Carbon Trust The Carbon Trust is an independent company set up by government in response to the threat of climate change, to accelerate the move to a low carbon economy by working with organisations to reduce carbon emissions and develop commercial low carbon technologies. The Carbon Trust works with UK business and the public sector through its work in five complementary areas: insights, solutions, innovations, enterprises and investments. Together these help to explain, deliver, develop, create and finance low carbon enterprise. The Carbon Trust is funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR), the Scottish Government, the Welsh Assembly Government and Invest Northern Ireland. The BCS The British Computer Society (BCS) is the Chartered industry body for IT professionals, the Chartered Engineering Institution for Information Technology and a Chartered Science Institution. With our rapidly growing membership, BCS is playing an increasingly pivotal role in leading the development and implementation of world class standards for the IT profession through innovative products, services and support. Through our specific “Professionalism in IT” programme, BCS is leading and building IT professionalism to levels which are currently only seen in more traditional long standing professions such as law, medicine, and accountancy but which will increasingly become the de facto standards for IT professionals.

Carbon emission reduction NOT Carbon neutral

2008-06-12T08:59:44Z

Having just returned from the UK it is interesting to reflect on the differences between the approaches to carbon emissions. In the UK they have had a government who recognized the issue of climate change earlier and therefore legislated to force behavioral change. While not way ahead of Australia, one of the things that I noticed, and liked, was the growing skepticism towards the carbon neutral claim. The focus is now on standards for product labeling of emissions. Consumers can make a choice not only on price and quality but also the amount of emissions the product produces. These standards require continuous reductions in emissions to maintain their status. The claiming of being Carbon Neutral without disclosure of what amounts are being offset (produced in the first place!) is frowned upon. As it should be. Come on Australia get on the front foot and stop running up the carbon neutral flag and congratulating yourselves on a job well done. Let's make who can reduce the most a competitive measure in this great capitalistic country of ours. Instead of who planted the most trees it should be about how has reduced their carbon emissions the most. It's about not doing it in the first place stupid.

Advertising agency remuneration problems - Retainers

2008-05-28T09:46:59Z

Many advertisers have moved from the old fashion media commission and service fee to retainers based on retaining a set resource, the cost of which is calculated based on the direct salary costs of those resources, multiplied by the overhead cost of the company and then multiplied by the profit margin. Retainers are generally considered to be easy to manage as for most advertisers they are set and forget. But two recent case studies highlight why retainers are not the ideal remuneration model for many advertisers and that the best remuneration model depends on their needs and circumstances. CASE STUDY 1 - PROBLEMS SETTING THE RIGHT LEVEL In negotiating a new remuneration model, the marketing team was unable to provide a definitive scope of work as much of the activity requirement was driven by the business, with marketing managing the execution. P3 suggested using the previous year's activity as a base line and adjusting the remuneration model up or down depending on the actual scope requirement, reviewed throughout the year. The agency proposed, what appeared on the surface, to be a more attractive "all you can eat" model with a 10% increase on the previous year's retainer but the agency would take on all marketing requirements. Within six months the agency was complaining because the resources were more than 40% over utilised. P3 was again engaged to determine why, because the marketing team could not identify any significant change in the level of work required. P3 discovered that two problems were responsible. Firstly marketing was using the "all you can eat" model to outsource admin and non-core functions to the agency such as the preparation of powerpoint presentations, dressing the client offices for major internal presentation and providing staff on secondment during leave. Secondly, the resource utilisation efficiency (the volume of resources required to execute an advertising deliverable) had decreased with account management and creative running 30% and 20% higher than expected. It appears that as it was all covered by the retainer, the marketing team was more likely to send the agency back to do further concepts more often. So while the "All you can eat" model looked attractive, within six months the agency maintained it was unsustainable without a 40% increase. This was difficult to dispute as the marketing team was unable to provide a defined scope of work. CASE STUDY 2 - DIFFICULT TO ADJUST The advertiser had in place a retainer agreement with their agency over many years and this had previously been adjusted to the consumer price index. This situation was sustained by the fact that the advertisers scope of work was relatively consistent each year. However, a new CMO and a new advertising strategy required a significant drop in the scope of work and naturally the CMO expected a similar drop in the retainer with the agency. The reduction in scope of work was considered by the advertiser to be in the region of 30% and they also wanted to reduce the additional reporting and co-ordination functions to achieve a 50% reduction in the retainer. The agency's first response to the reduction in scope of work and removal of the non-core services was a small 10% reduction in account management only. P3 was engaged by the client but the problem was that no previous data had been collected on the scope of work undertaken or the level or resources required to deliver it. The agency contract meant that the retainer could not be reduced until the annual review (10 months away) so the agency had time on their side. However, P3 undertook an analysis of the scope of work delivered for the past two years from the agencies financial records and used this with our benchmarks to calculate the level of resources typically required to execute this same. This then became the baseline from which we were able to project the reduction that would be expected based on the changes required by the CMO. While it did not support the 50% reduction, we were able to prove to the agency that the reduction was higher than the 10% they maintained.]]>

The Hidden Carbon Culprit

2008-05-22T09:27:25Z

The paper industry continues to cop the brunt of the environmentalist anger when it comes to the evils of carbon emissions. Some of this is justified. But there is another CO2 monster lurking in the office. Marketers tend have a simplistic catch-cry of ‘move away from paper based communications and go on-line’. So let’s have a look at some basic facts and figures about on-line. Approximately 1.5% p.a. of power consumed in the United States goes to running the server farms. That’s over 1 GtCO2 p.a. ( 1,000,000,000 tonnes) A basic national buy of banner ads on one of Australia’s top search engines will give the advertiser over 700,000 views delivered per day. This adds up to over 7 tonnes of CO2-e entering the atmosphere every week for this simple cost effective medium. In the current uninformed, unmeasured world of marketing communications this works well for marketers as they can buy bucket loads of on-line banners and pop-ups for a fraction of the price of print. Being so cheap means there are literally millions of page views sent out that by sheer weight of numbers (and carbon) they target their specific audience. When used in a very targeted manner on-line is a very cost and carbon efficient way to market. Print needs to think about targeting and be transparent about the emissions caused by the process, unlike the silent on-line industry. The print industry does need to continue to reinvent itself in the new climate change era. It is now vital for both future cost control (carbon will have a cost and so electricity prices will rise) and reputation, to reduce waste and operate a more energy efficient business. Plus help your customers better target their communications, even if it does mean printing fewer items.

Beware of the carbon neutral lure

2008-05-16T07:27:47Z

In Australia there has been a rapid growth of marketing services companies claiming ‘carbon neutrality’, and built-in offsets’. Also some of these suppliers are now indicating offsets as a loading (some TV production estimates are starting to have an 0.8% carbon offset fee as a line item) or claiming, either with accreditation or on their own calculations, to be ‘carbon neutral’. So is it a case of business as usual and charge the end consumer for planting a tree? In my option advertisers should take ownership of any offsetting they wish to buy. This will ensure that is compliant and also lines up with the company's environmental strategy. Regardless of how many trees you pay to plant the point is the emissions are still occurring in the first place.

The perils of claiming the Green high ground

2008-05-16T07:20:22Z

Slowly but surely examples of bad luck or bad management of a company’s environmental positioning are creeping into the media. The resent classic was Sir Paul McCartney’s gift for helping the planet, the eco-friendly Hybrid Lexus, being delivered by jet from Japan! In the rush to measure these offset emissions, care must be taken before using this ‘carbon neutrality’ and putting your company’s flag on the moral high ground.

Green-washers beware: Tesco show the the correct way to market their eco direction

2008-05-01T07:38:41Z

I have just read with interest the news from Tesco where they are showing the amount of carbon that is being generated between 'seed and store' on 20 of their items. Yes they are maximizing the marketing mileage of this by telling everyone that they are acting in an environmentally responsible way. To me this transparency is to be applauded. They are talking about the good things they are doing and at the same time not being afraid to show the world the amount of carbon they are putting out in the process. Let's hope this lead is followed. Too many companies are waving their 'carbon neutral' accreditation flags out of their windows without telling us the contribution they are making to climate change. While Tesco have a long way to go, I for one think it is a great example for all those Green-washers out their on how correctly to position their environmental credentials. Who's next? And do not forget about measuring the amount of carbon that is generated from telling us what a great green job you are doing. "Tesco Launches Carbon-Labeling on Products" Tesco, the world's third-largest food store launched a carbon labeling system that makes it easy for shoppers to compare the carbon footprint created by competing products like detergents, juices, and light bulbs. With the help of Britain's Carbon Trust, a government organization, the retailer is measuring the greenhouse gas emissions associated with each of 20 products from "seed to store." Letting consumers know how much energy it takes to create, ship, package and use the product. A simple set of numbers on a black footprint label tells shoppers how many grams of carbon or equivalent greenhouse gases were emitted as a result of bringing a product to market. It also considers the impact of preparing or using a product and then disposing of any waste. For some products it will also tell you how the carbon footprint compares with other similar products, so you can tell which has the smallest carbon footprint. Some labels will also give you tips about how to reduce a product’s footprint when you cook it, use it or dispose of it. For instance, the potato when baked uses far more energy than when it is boiled or microwaved. The carbon label has been added to four sets of products for this trial: potatoes, orange juice, washing detergent and light bulbs. For each product, a variety of different types were compared -- like chilled fresh juice with cartons of juice made from concentrate.... Also read Sir Terry Leahy speech on the theme of “Green Grocer? on http://www.tesco.com/climatechange/