Representing the ultimate industry achievement, 15 campaigns have accomplished such a feat in 2016. Six of the fifteen Cases are for commercial brands. The others are not-for-profit or corporate social responsibility campaigns. The number of Cases for Creativity in 2016 dropped by two, compared to 2015 (17). In 2014 and 2013, there were 12 apiece and in 2012, when the first study launched, there were just nine.
Hurman comments, “Two of this year’s group are retrospective effectiveness awards, acknowledging the success, over many years, of Old Spice and John Lewis. These feel like proper creative advertising. Campaigns that have taken two brands that by rights should have been as dull as dishwater and made them transcend their natural order - made leaders of them.
“But looking at the other, more recent campaigns, I worry that we’re losing the ability to do that. We are in danger of becoming overly seduced by anything that is trying to save the world. In addition, our commercial campaigns look less like efforts to make brands transcendent and more like attempts to follow a fashion of being so real and authentic that we actually avoid creativity.
“Whilst these campaigns can be disarming to the consumer, I’m not sure it’s really creative. Most troubling, these campaigns all feel just a bit too similar. Like we have stopped awarding work that is different and started awarding work that is the same. As the gold Effies prove, these campaigns are effective, but we mustn’t lose the ability to set brands apart with big shiny ideas, as we are in danger of losing the magic that creative agencies can add to brands.”
To view in full The Gunn Report’s Cases for Creativity 2016 study, go here.
