Brand Republic reported on the WPP Annual General Meeting, kinda highlighting a point made in MultiCultClassics’ post on the lack of respect for the creative process. Apparently, 41.8 percent of WPP investors expressed unhappiness over the seemingly bloated compensation packages of CEO Sir Martin Sorrell, CFO Paul Richardson and Digital Director Mark Read. Chairman Philip Lader felt compelled to address the costs:
Lader defended WPP’s core marketing communications business, dismissing those who claim creative campaigns are a waste of money.
Lader said: “For as long as we can remember, there have been commentators—and sometimes thoughtful and authoritative commentators—who have believed, and claimed, that much of the expenditure on marketing communications is prompted by vanity rather than the legitimate pursuit of profit.
“We have been told that marketing was history and that brands were dead.
“If ever such an analysis was going to be tested and found to be true, it would have been over the last few years. Even in good times, our client companies don’t spend money on research and marketing without sound reason.
“When times are more difficult, every last item of expenditure is examined and tested and expected to justify its existence by contributing to the maintenance of commercial health.”
He went on to say that the “company’s continuous pursuit of creative excellence” is “driven by the demonstrable fact that good ideas—the managed application of the imagination—make our clients’ money go further. Inventiveness has a huge value.”
Lader’s words clearly acknowledge that a huge number of WPP investors question the true value of inventiveness. In short, the very people behind advertising agencies do not unanimously support the creative process. It’s a safe bet that investors at the meeting were not dining on McRib® sandwiches. But look for them to ultimately demand that workers within the holding company make the saucy mess a staple in their diets.
No comments:
Post a Comment