Fernando Machado on lasers and chandeliers—and how to balance creativity and measurement

When it comes to marketing, I wish I could measure absolutely everything and know ahead of time what the outcomes of our activities would be. I wish attribution models were all perfect and our activities had a proven impact both in short-term sales and in strengthening the brand over time—all of that with an r² above 0.90 (this is the engineer in me coming out). Life would be so much better, as work would be so much easier. CMOs and CFOs would live in perfect harmony, leaving the office by 4:30 p.m. every day with an Excel spreadsheet that proves future success. And ultimately, CMOs would become CEOs more often and we would all embrace “creative effectiveness.” I wish. See all of Ad Age’s 2024 Creativity Award winners here The thing with models is they are built based on past performance. The analysis usually compares a theoretical evaluation versus a database and correlates that to past performance. So, most likely, high precision on the output probably means you are doing something that follows a similar pattern to the past. In other words (and I’m surely oversimplifying a bit), something that is “proven to work” is probably somewhat similar to something that has worked well in the past. Believe it or not, I have seen experienced people present a complete disregard for the marketing funnel I learned in school. Instead of seeing the funnel as a continuum from “awareness” to “purchase,” some folks wish it were a “tunnel” with every single level labeled as “purchase” (or “even more purchase”). That’s why marketers tend to face questions such as “But will this help us sell more?” and “Can you prove that?” with every idea they bring to the table. Also, certain things are more easily measured than others. It is very easy to measure sales, especially if you are a direct-to-consumer business. Sales figures are very factual. And no matter what type of marketer or creative you are, in the end you will need to deliver sales and profit (unless you are working for a nonprofit, of course). So, of course things you do must drive sales. But assuming things are not working because brand marketing activities are not shifting brand health in the short term is not necessarily the right conclusion. Should we not care about attribution, measurement and return on investment? No, of course we should care about all those things. What I said in the first paragraph is precisely what I think. But it is wishful thinking. Also from Fernando Machado: Snoop, Solo Stove and why creativity is under attack The issue with predictably and models is that something creative usually breaks patterns from the past. Creativity tends have an output that is different than the norm. And by its nature, something that is truly creative will set your brand or activity to be different from things that have been done in the past and add a good level of uncertainty to whatever predictive model you may have. I am all for measurement and attribution. Why wouldn’t I be? At the same time, I believe creativity unlocks brand and business growth. And the more creative you are, the trickier it will be to predict outcomes. That’s why I get frustrated when people hide behind research pointing to the fact that something that is clearly not good tested well or that something that has potential to be disruptive didn’t test so well. Great marketing teams test things to learn, not to delegate decisions to research results. In terms of the marketing funnel, I truly believe that, in nine out of 10 cases, full-funnel strategies tend to give the best outcomes. I’ve seen firsthand how bottom-of-the-funnel marketing gets more efficient when the top-of-the-funnel is properly funded (to the despair of the “purchase-only marketing funnel experts”). And yet it seems lots of people in the industry are always questioning top-of-the-funnel activities as if they were not needed. I think Brian Chesky of Airbnb said it best when explaining how his co-founder Joe Gebbia describes the balance required between top-of-the-funnel and bottom-of-the-funnel activities: “If you want to light up a room, performance marketing is a laser. It can light up a corner of a room. You don’t want to use a bunch of lasers to light up an entire room. You should use a chandelier, and that’s what brand marketing is.” (Source: Lenny’s Podcast.) I would go further by saying “top-of-the-funnel marketing” rather than just “brand marketing,” to be honest. But I still love the quote because it does capture the spirit of what we are talking about here. See all of Ad Age’s 2024 Creativity Award winners here Finally, regarding brand health metrics, those tend to be trickier to measure and attribute. In my experience, changing brand perception does take time. Think of a brand like Dove (established 1957) or Burger King (established 1954). Your new campaign or product launch, even with a boatload of investment, will be a drop in the ocean of the brand’s history. And the perception people have of a brand is based on their entire history with that brand. I am sure one will be able to find a case when brand perception shifted fast, but normally what I’ve seen is a different story. The best path seems to be finding the right balance about how you measure, attribute, approach the marketing funnel and deliver short- and long-term results. Frankly, most of the right approaches in life tend to revolve around balance. The reality is that creativity can be a source of competitive advantage. Creativity is effective (that’s why I struggle when people use the term “creative effectiveness”—isn’t that redundant?). If you have the right brief linked to the right strategic priority, a creative solution will surely help you get better results and be effective.

Fernando Machado on lasers and chandeliers—and how to balance creativity and measurement

Featured Stories