Essay 4694

Under The Big Tent at AdAge.com, Pepper Miller points to Procter & Gamble as her selection for “Multicultural Marketing’s Best Practice.” In her post—which can be viewed by clicking on the essay title above—Miller quoted from an email sent by MultiCultClassics. Here’s the excerpt:

“High Jive, an anonymous multicultural marketing watcher of sorts, is neither a P&G ‘hater’ nor a fan. However, the writer had this to say about P&G’s practices with one of its Black agencies: ‘P&G certainly dedicates above-average support for minority marketing. But they still leave a lot to be desired. For example, a few years ago, P&G awarded Pantene business to Carol H. Williams’ agency. Yet the commercials introducing Pantene’s ‘Black’ hair care products were produced by the mass-market agency (although they may have permitted CHW to ‘consult’ on some levels). Not sure if the situation has improved much, but I hope it has.’”

MultiCultClassics highlights this because there was more to the quote that wasn’t presented in the post; plus, there’s more to consider regarding P&G and Miller’s perspective.

First, if P&G or anyone else responds to the Pantene references, they will undoubtedly declare the decisions were based on limited financial resources. Money remains the convenient excuse that prevents clients from doing the right thing. Yet it should also be noted that mass-market agency Grey New York, which handles the Pantene account, has often played political games to maintain total control.

Way back in Essay Two (posted in March 2005), MultiCultClassics commented on a fresh P&G effort involving its mass-market and minority partners. Here’s an excerpt:

“Procter & Gamble recently launched an initiative to better distribute assignments across all its agencies. At a kick-off gathering, multicultural advertising icon Thomas Burrell insisted that the client should be responsible for managing the integrated brainstorm. Burrell recognized that in today’s arena, ethnic agencies and mass-market agencies are direct competitors. And if mass-market agencies continued to enjoy majority rule, the initiative would not realize its potential. Only time will tell if the P&G gambit generates meaningful progress.”

The excerpt is injected now to demonstrate that P&G is trying. Despite anything you may believe about the corporation, it is among the forward-thinking clients—even though much of the advertising can be hampered by committee-driven conservatism. P&G attempts to be innovative in its decisions and actions, taking pride in being a marketing leader.

Yes, P&G allocates above-average dollars for multicultural marketing. But in our industry, above-average dollars does not equal adequate funding, especially because the majority of advertisers aren’t dedicated to targeting minority audiences. In other words, the average sucks. The truth is, P&G is doing what every advertiser should minimally be doing. Only in America’s multicultural marketing arena does somewhat sufficient commitment translate to being the best.

Miller also stated, “P&G invests in relevant research … and is the first major corporation to tell the Black woman’s beauty story via its new program, myblackisbeautiful.com.” Again, investing in relevant research does not equal adequate funding—especially when compared to the loot handed to mass-market account planners and focus groupies. Additionally, it could be argued that other advertisers have celebrated Black women, the most recent being Vaseline with its skinvoice.com (which is currently undergoing revisions, probably due to poor funding).

This essay is honestly not intended to blast P&G, but rather, to challenge the corporation—and ultimately, the entire industry. In the original email to Miller, MultiCultClassics proposed a groundbreaking-yet-simple concept that P&G is uniquely qualified to execute.

To legitimately position itself as the best, P&G should assign a multicultural shop as AOR for a brand. Not AOR for the minority portion, but for the whole enchilada.

Few advertisers have the ability to pull off this feat. If McDonald’s or Coca-Cola tried to award the lion’s share of its business to a multicultural shop, the internal leaders would nix the notion. Sorry, there are too many owner-operators and bottlers with biased opinions who would deny the possibility.

On the other hand, P&G has a different structure than typical major clients. This is an enterprise comprised of multiple brands. As a result, it seems less politically problematic for P&G to give the reins of, say, Bounty paper towels to a multicultural shop.

P&G has already exhibited a certain edgy willingness to go beyond traditional choices by teaming with agencies like Weiden + Kennedy. At the same time, there are numerous multicultural shops—particularly the Latino powerhouses on P&G’s roster—that have exhibited they can deliver beyond their traditional responsibilities.

In her post, Miller wrote that the Brooklyn Dodgers signed Jackie Robinson not for diversity reasons, but because the team wanted to win. If our industry wants to evolve, while shattering the existing segregated mess, a multicultural shop must be given a real shot at competing in the big leagues.

Is P&G ready to step up to the plate?