BBH: A few Questions
BBH: the story so far…
Formed in 1982, Bartle Bogle Hegarty immediately became one of the best, most respected and coolest ad agencies in the UK and the world. It’s work for such diverse clients as Levi’s, Audi and Lynx established it as not only an awards magnet, but also an agency capable of dictating what was cool to an entire generation.
So far so good.
I have to admit, as someone who has worked for the last four years at an agency that never pitches, and for the last 16 months in LA, I don’t keep very close tabs on the British agency ‘scene’. That said, occasionally a lazy moment might lead my fingers to corners of the internet related to the ‘industry’. One of those moments found me checking out the website of the aforementioned BBH. I had a good old scroll, dear reader, and I must tell you, I am now rather confused. Confused enough to ask the following questions:
1. Why is your ‘about’ section so self-contradictory?
The power of difference to make a difference.
That’s what we believe in. That’s what we do.
We create ideas that make a real difference to our clients’ businesses. Setting them apart from their competitors. Shaping culture, rather than just following it.
Our enduring commitment to difference is best embodied by The Black Sheep. It represents our businesses, our culture and the people who work here.
BBH is a set of highly specialist and connected creative businesses offering services such as UX, digital, ecommerce and CRM, agile production and sports marketing. Different skills working together to unlock the power of difference for our clients.
By that I mean that if you espouse the characteristics of the ‘black sheep’, or the one that goes against the grain, why write such generic waffle about yourself? Then again, I’m not sure any other company is combining those varied attributes, so maybe that’s what they mean by embodying the Black Sheep.
2. If BBH is an advertising agency, why isn’t ‘advertising’ one of the words after ‘such as’ in the last paragraph of the ‘about’ section? Oddly enough it’s just UX, digital, ecommerce and CRM, agile production (what exactly is that?) and sports marketing. Is that really what BBH has become? An agency that lists six things that form its offering to the paying client, none of which is advertising, and one of which is ‘sports marketing’?
3. Why is sports marketing such a big deal to BBH? Here’s BBH’s explanation:
We believe in the power of sport.
It is innately emotional and inherently social.
Combine the power of sport with the power of creativity and the results can be staggering.
We work with sports brands, sporting events, sports talent, rights holders and organisations wanting to build their brand through sport.
We are a collection of people, from very different backgrounds, united by a love of sport and brand building.
They even have Uber-CD Ewan Patterson in charge of it all. But you could replace the word ‘sport’ with ‘music’ in the above, so what I don’t get is why sport and not something else? Many ad agencies have very strong sport connections (eg: W&K, 180), but do they offer separate sports marketing? Not that I’m aware of. Ewan and Lawrence Dallaglio (yes, that one) are listed as ‘Founding Partners’, so it’s not just a division of the company, it’s something a little more substantial than that. Perhaps it’s a very clever idea to get into a growing niche. Perhaps I’m just behind the times.
4. I know doing the Christmas ad for a big retailer is hard, but what’s all this about?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nzLTkKd9Q0
It seems really misjudged, both as a piece of communication and as a representation of this cornerstone British brand. Aren’t Tesco in trouble, relatively speaking? Will this help?
5. While we’re on the subject of actual advertising, how is this connected to a tube of sweets? And do they really expect anyone to believe the whole thing hasn’t been faked?
6. There seems to be an increasing focus on digital (I’ve even heard tell that they are attempting to move their clients away from TV). If that’s the case, why is their explanation of their digital offering so vague?
Digital Products and services:
Digital innovation helping brands deliver their promise through better or new experiences.
On the same subject, why is their TV section full of ‘Content’ and ‘Integrated’ work, even though both those disciplines have their own sections? Could BBH, the place that routinely used to walk BTAA Agency of the Year, really not muster eight TV spots for their website?
8. They have an interesting image of a sheep, divided into sections like a butcher’s diagram. Tellingly, the largest section, right in the middle, is of course for Sports Marketing. Elsewhere, they offer something called ‘Creative Studio’: Based in Milton Keynes. Focused on delivering creative that sells at every touch-point along the consumer journey. Does the stuff they do in Kingly Street not focus on delivering creative that sells at every touch-point along the consumer journey? What happens in Milton Keynes that can’t happen in London?
Look, I get that the work isn’t perhaps of the standard of the 80s/90s/2000s, but this entire site seems to convey an image of a corporation seeking out uninspiring ways in which to make money. The old BBH, the one that inspired insane jealousy amongst the world’s creatives, the one that resigned Asda because they wouldn’t let them make good work, even the one that got the country talking with those Yeo Valley ads, well, it seems to have disappeared.
That’s a huge shame for advertising as a whole, for if this is what BBH has now become, what hope is there for the UK’s other agencies?
they used to be independent when they were good. Now they sold out to a holding company and have other things in mind rather than creative. Isn’t it as simple as that?
I don’t think it is as simple as that.
Most of the agencies in the country/world are part of holding companies, and yet many can still produce excellent work.
Why can’t BBH be one of those?
I think the bigger reason might be the final departure of all the founders, including the recent loss of Sir John.
I don’t miss pitching at all.
But yes, there are plenty of new stresses that have replaced it.
Wow. That Tesco ad. What the flying fuck is that?
I alway thought calling yourself the black sheep was a spectacularly white sheep thing to do.
Great post, thanks Ben. They’ve lost their identity over the past couple of years. I do think it’s worthwhile at this stage to challenge what they stand for. Tesco is a bit of a shambles. Top 4 supermarkets are always going to be challenge with uninspiring clients, but I do agree – the work so far is terrible. The past Waitrose work was great, so it’s a real shame their creative integrity took a beating to the Tesco ££ millions.
As you’ve described, BBH define themselves as having certain business specialisms, which in fairness, they do provide. No denying a lot of the work over the past 30+ years has been first class. Crafting TV ads the way they do, challenging what digital stands for, creating/backing new products and seeing Sports based marketing as a specialism in itself – led by people with some serious sports industry leads. At the end of the day, sports marketing sells – promotional activities, personalities at the forefront of client campaigns – it’s not a bad place to stamp your mark as an agency having a set division at the London HQ.
As an ex BBH-er, I can give some clarity to the ‘Creative Lab’. I believe was set-up to service Audi initially, one of their founding clients, which is based in Milton Keynes around the corner from their agency base. It also acts as an overspill for pitch-work, CRM, social and straight forward print/digital work for their key clients. It’s also a regional office of sorts, which is focused on serving more ‘local’ clients, whilst having the gravitas of a larger London based agency with the prestige of the BBH name. But mainly, it’s right next to Audi and it keeps them sweet.
I really do hope BBH turn it around. The problem lies with losing good people and hiring those that are attracted to the name only, not the quality of it’s output. What makes agencies great are the people and they’ve lost that part of their soul a little, a lot of staff leveraging their top work for other opportunities + the industry is better for it. The old timers are still there, but innovation comes from everywhere – and all those at BBH need to follow that vision. I’m quite sure 2016 will be a big year for them.
…I started at BBH in 1984. I think there were only 30 odd people there at the time.
There was no hiding place, everything got scrutinised by John. If you messed up on a trade ad you got your ear’ole tweaked.
Still, it’s where I learned how to art direct so I can’t complain.
I never understood the ‘Black Sheep’ bit because for me they were at their best when they were doing conventional advertising that was crafted to the hilt.
How the mighty have fallen.
This is a story similar to many agencies I expect.
And although it has been said, it really is down to the people that agencies hire.
Today we live in rather uncritical and creative times. Bob Hoffman recently made the comment that he couldn’t say what he now does when he ran his agency. Ie he could tell the truth, that’s a shame isn’t it. And I do get his point too, he has an agency and it’s employees to protect. Everyone has been there haven’t they?
A part of being creative is being critical of others ideas and being able to speak out in defence of your own thoughts, rationally.
In society today their is very little critical thinking and in fact there is probably more censorship than debate. And anyone that dares to disagree is vilified as immoral, a bigot or retarded.
Even at Universities today they are banning any form of radial ideas – even Germain Greer was banned from speaking at Cardiff Uni recently – Germaine fucking Greer!!.
The call now is from Student Unions to make universities ‘safe spaces’ where any idea that doesn’t agree with the mainstream left (not sure that is quite right by the way, PC idea brigade maybe,) is not tolerated and their idea (even if misinformed) certainly can’t be debated.
Are agencies becoming safe spaces? Are agencies really now just places that simply recruit the same type of people over and over that are likely to agree with what is already thought?
I don’t know if ‘safe spaces’ or criticism is the crux of this situation.
BBH clearly wants to head in these directions, and is doing so deliberately, so the criticism might come from people with different priorities. But are they any more or less valid than the opinions who selected these paths?
You and I might lament the end of a great institution, but several people critical to the change think the new direction is better. Better financially? Better for the long term? No idea, but when you have an organisation of hundreds of people you are unlikely to get wholesale agreement over many things.