You might be an advertising industry talent, but that doesn’t mean you have to be a ‘jerk’
A seemingly innocuous Mumbrella story about a recent adland appointment produced a heated debate on the comment thread as to whether being talented was more important than being nice – questioning if the two things could actually co-exist together – Neal Moore investigates
I’ve never met Andrew Hook, Havas’s recently departed chief creative officer, but reading the comments beneath this story on his move to VCCP last month – I want to.
Of the 24 comments to date 13 actively praise Andrew for being, “one of the nicest creative leaders out there,” a “great personality with a good heart” and a, “great leader and motivator and, ultimately, a wonderful human being.”
Is this guy the Mother Theresa of advertising or what? Andrew, if you’re reading this, please be my friend.
However, as anyone who has ever spent time in the trenches of Mumbrella’s comments section can attest, this outpouring of agreeability could not last and so it was that commenter #12, Yam Seng, kicked down the door of the Andrew Hook Appreciation Society and started shooting
“I’m not really sure about this agency’s [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] ….this is kinda confirmed when such a critical make or break hire can only attract comments like ‘nice’ / ‘wonderful human being’ / ‘good heart’ / ‘great personality’ etc.”
Just to clarify, Yam Seng does not believe that being a wonderful human being with a good heart and a great personality is what agencies or clients really want. Good to know.
A couple of Andrew Hook’s biggest fans, let’s call them Hookers, race to their hero’s defence but are swotted aside by commenter #15 – the cheerfully named ‘Race To The Bottom’ who states: “If you care that much about ‘nice’ maybe you should work at a cake shop.”
As a diligent advertising exec, we must assume ‘Race To The Bottom’ has done his/her research, and has the data and insights to back up this sweeping generalisation about cake shop workers.
But does he/she and the 11 other commenters of comparable persuasion have a point? Is being nice a requirement to work in advertising? Are affability and talent mutually exclusive? Do nice guys finish last and the good die young?
I could, and probably should, now present my research and findings along with some first party quotes that attempt to find a reasoned yet conclusive answer to this conundrum. However, I don’t need to. The answer is ‘no, there is no need or excuse for being a dick’.
Advertising is a tough enough gig already and it’s not getting any easier. There is pressure coming from management consultancies above and creative apps/platforms below. Clients are more demanding than ever and the consumer more elusive.
If the ad industry is going to work, it needs to work together because – whether we like it or not – creatives need suits and suits need creatives. And, of course, we all need each other to get through those all-night pitch sessions and early-morning briefings.
That doesn’t mean we can’t keep our oddballs and eccentrics. In fact, they’re essential. What is not essential is for them to be nasty to be visionary. As the Netflix chief executive officer Reed Hastings puts it: “Do not tolerate brilliant jerks. The cost to teamwork is too high.” And, to be fair, he seems to be doing alright doesn’t he?
One of the more intriguing comments under Andrew’s story is from someone called ‘A Sad State Of Affairs’ He/she says: “If I met a rock-star covered in tattoos, that had sold millions of albums and was revered the world over, you can allow a bit of arrogant d@*kishness, but not from someone in advertising.”
I respectfully disagree. If I met a rock star, a musical genius I had revered my whole life and he or she turned out to be a dick, I’d be as disappointed in them as anyone I’d met in advertising. Probably more so.
When I worked in publishing, there was always a dividing line between sales and editorial. The journos thought themselves artists whose wondrous prose drove readers to the news stands in anticipation of their latest opus. The sales guys thought themselves benevolent heroes for paying the salaries of these half-boiled hacks.
Then when the internet came for our display ads and classifieds, we realised that we needed to work together to adapt; and to create new offerings such as native advertising, advertorials and events that were both commercially viable and editorially credible. Those that didn’t, died.
Let’s not go the same way in advertising. Let’s be nice to each other, work together and start honouring our kindest and most generous leaders as well as our most talented. You never know, we might find out they are one and the same.
Neal Moore is the founder of Moore’s Lore Media, a content strategy and consultancy firm based in Singapore
Mr Moore seems to delight in twisting words to suit his ultra liberal agenda…..at this level, you have to be super talented, ie. put out or be known for putting out some great work…without being an outright C**T!
Clear enough?
Being only nice makes for a pleasant working environment….and bland work, like we have seen….but given his background, I don’t expect him to [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines].
ReplyDear Snowflake,
Had you respectfully debated your own opinions against Neil’s, you would have seemed less like an idiot than attacking the author who has the industry’s best interests at heart.
But now let me tell you why your argument is stupid.
1) Bland work… now that’s subjective. He wouldn’t have made it this far in life if he wasn’t super talented. Not his fault that you haven’t reached where he is today.
Reply2) If you’d rather be recognised for your work instead of your personality then you’re not very aspirational in life. Being celebrated for having a good heart is probably one of the toughest things to achieve. And clearly you’re failing at it.
3) If you think Neil has an ‘ultra liberal agenda’, then it seems your agenda by this comment is to make it acceptable for ad folks to be a**h****, which I presume you are. And I bet you’re not very talented either. Because if you were, you’d be CCO of Havas. Which you’re not.
[Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] – stop talking about yourself in the 3rd person. It’s just weird.
ReplyWTF-This chap calls the few Andrew Hook supporters Hookers? Is that supposed to be funny or something? An attempt at wit? If I were Andrew Hook I’d be reading this little piece and be thinking, “Thanks but no thanks, stranger.” Please go talk about yourself on the back of another [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] ECD.
ReplyIf Neal were to talk about himself in the third person, Neal would probably spell his name right 😉
ReplyThe answer is simple. Nice and talented needs to be one package. If you’re nice but not talented, good and ambitious people will leave. Even if they love you as a human being. If you’re talented but a real asshole, good and ambitious people will leave too. Because they do not have to put up with your bullshit if they are good. So there is really no need for a debate on this. It isn’t rocket science.
ReplyYou nailed it. Nice AND talented need to be in one package.
I have worked under/with creative “leaders” who were talented but insufferable jerks, and in the end karma hit them like a sledgehammer.
I have also come across those who were wonderful people but simply were not very good as creatives. And in the end, they didn’t last either.
I will say that I did learn a lot from both types, sometimes via directly transferable skills/knowledge/attitudes, and sometimes just as an object lesson in what not to do.
ReplyThe idea that suits and creatives are mutually exclusive is the problem here – that model died 20 yrs ago and yet it still lingers, particularly in networks where things don’t change.
How we ever believed creative could come form a ‘department’ I’ll never know..
ReplyLook at BBH as an example. They wear the “good and nice” badge on their sleeves, and consistently churn out great work as a result. John and Wigley are the nicest people and leaders you’ll meet, but they also have matter between their ears to run their agency to the top.
It’s simplistic to think that you’ve to be a dick to get ahead in advertising. Anyone who thinks that needs to get a reality check.
ReplyI completely agree with you about John and Charles.
However, they are literally the only example, I could think of, after 30 minutes, I gave up.
Sadly, almost as a rule, creative heads are talented p*****, talentless p*****, nice but useless and none of the three circles intersect, except for a few rare exceptions who actually end up proving the rule
ReplyI like this article, although I think it’s a shame it has to be said.
ReplyI can’t believe anyone is defending dickishness in advertising. How stupid is this, seriously.
As for valuing brilliant jerks: I feel like they’re much rarer than you’d imagine.
I’ve worked for jerks before – not brilliant jerks, just jerks who thought they were brilliant and therefore get away with bad behaviour. Which, by the way, they couldn’t.
As for those rare brilliant jerks who I have come across – mainly sales managers who are brilliant at bringing in sales but terrible at managing their teams – I noticed they caused so much damage to morale that I’d seriously question their worth.
Oh, and, FWIW, the best manager I’ve ever had was also the nicest and most understanding. And under him, I did the best work I’ve ever done, and had a great time doing it.
ReplyAll these folks talking about nice as if it’s the ONLY thing that matters.
This is why we have come to a stage today where everyone needs to be given prize for participation or else it might affect their self esteem.
Human endeavour suffers when nice is the only benchmark.
You think Steve Jobs is nice? How about Elon Musk? Im sure we all demand that leaders should be fair but asking for this textbook definition of niceness is leading us all into the abyss of mediocrity.
ReplyIt’s not a binary world.
Niceness is a bonus to talent.
Not a matter of either/or.
Too many creatives reject being nice because they see it as a sign of weakness.
Worse still, they behave like jerks as a misguided projection of creative talent.
Given a chance, I can’t see why anyone would want to work for a bullying jerk?
ReplyCouldn’t agree more. We all have jobs to do, while it is important to be professional, I don’t actually care if a creative leader is ‘nice’ – if i don’t learn from him/her and I’d hang with my friends if I needed to be around ‘nice’ people. Get real – ‘nice’ is a bonus, but it is very difficult to be Mr Nice Guy and please clients (in this day and age) at the same time. I didn’t see Havas Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines].
Reply“Niceness is a bonus to talent.”
Not the other way around.
I couldn’t have put it better….
ReplyWould you rather work with someone who is nice? Or someone who is talented but could sometimes be a dick? I’d rather suck it up, toughen it up, and work for someone who’s talent I can learn from. Who cares if they are nice? Be less of a snowflake and maybe you can become better at your jobs.
ReplyShocking. I can’t believe we are even discussing this. This world and the jealous lots among us have gone so bloody soft. Just when I thought the Mumbrella Trolls had nothing to say about this chap other than a few well-wishers suggesting he is nice-BAM. There must be a problem here. You can’t win. If you’re somebody like Chris Reed you get smashed, if you are too nice like Andrew you get smashed. [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]. The facts are: Havas was not a creatively awarded shop under [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]. With the [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] agency at best. Regardless, there are penalties for being a Chris Reed or Andrew Hook in this town.
ReplyWorking for a nice but untalented creative chief: you’ll be happy, go home on time, get all the crap you do approved with a smile and a pat on the back.
Working for a talented but not very nice creative chief: you will be grumpy, swear a lot and be pushed till you are ready to crumble….but your portfolio will shine.
Working for a Creative Chairman/woman who is both untalented and not a nice person: the definition of true hell.
Managers who are not tasked with making creative work don’t understand these things, because they’ve never stared down the barrel of a shit brief with a 6 hour deadline…its as simple as that.
Reply… simple as that for all employees, especially management, across all disciplines.
Nice means, someone not toxic that can put their foot down in a way, that gets others behind them. Good means someone that leads with talent, clarity and inspiring actions.
ReplyIndeed, nice does not mean a pushover or a pussy, it means respectful, professional and appreciative amongst other things. I once worked for a super-talented Sales Director who bought in the money but was also an abusive drunk who harassed his female colleagues and hazed his juniors, by the logic of many of these comments I should have been grateful!
ReplyYou’ve got a bee in your bonnet Mr Moore, because you’ve obviously got your own definition of ‘nice’ and you only want to reference it.
Replytalented d***s, untalented nice guys.. both are still way better than complete frauds. let’s talk about those guys instead, the guys who come in off of exaggerated linkedin profiles, get high paid jobs then do strange things like layouts in photoshops, take creative lead positions when they’ve never gone on a single shoot…
Replyone most recently just got let go from a CD position at [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] Singapore.
Good topic.
ReplyBut frauds have been around in advertising since it started.
It’s easy to blame them.
I blame the people above who hire them.
Being a ‘jerk’ is something that is ‘trained’ within many creative departments.
I had a great working relationship with a creative. We both enjoyed worked together and did great work. Her boss didn’t like it. Thought she fraternizing with the ‘enemy’. Even said to her, all account service and planners should be fearful of creatives. Explicitly, said to her don’t not be nice to any account service or planner. This is what is being taught within some creative departments and tolerated within some agencies.
We are all here to do great work together. Everyone’s opinion is equal. Coming into a meeting where one creative/account handler/planner thinks their opinion matters the most, therefore can be a disrespectful jerk to anyone should not be tolerated.
Netflix openly says they do not tolerate brilliant jerks…..why should we?
ReplyI think you’re referencing being a total shitbag (which your creative boss clearly is in this case).
Not being ‘nice’ professionally comprises behaviour that can be grouped into the following buckets: demanding, not much into pleasantries, awkward etc.
Theres no room for being a nasty person.
Replyniceness doesn’t work in corporate world like adv.
Replythe trick will be – how not be nasty and an asshole.
rest is life.
This guy’s [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] sadden’s me. But I never heard of [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] before so maybe it works. The new way to make a rep. What do I know, I’ve left the business so many years ago already. I only heard about this little scrum from one of my Singaporean mates who is now on the client side and thought I’d chirp in.
No, nice isn’t a good thing for an ECD (Now titled CCOs). They get a rep for biting the hands of suits and planners then they are quarantined or put down faster than you can say “brief rejected”. We, the account people run agencies. Suits used to do it before the accountants took over. We’d hire and fire creative leaders like they were head football coaches. The nicer ones that obeyed we keep a while longer like pets until they get too pricy to keep as a FTE. (Full Time Employee.) Then we re-released them into the wild.
These days the ECDs and Digital Whatevers are nowhere near the calibre that we used to have on this island. It wasn’t all scam work. It really wasn’t, because when you opened ST we had some decent advertising to see once in a while. And in Biz times we had smarter ads to read.
Now that everybody in the world his a digital transformation or UX expert, nobody is around who knows how to do the ads. Suits are afraid of strong and talented creative leaders. We demand NICE. We always have been slightly jealous because the crazy ones could run an agency by charisma alone without the laptop memos or bags of gold. They tried to be nice in a job that is impossible. Anybody would crack under that kind of pressure and I saw so many come and go.
It was always a shame but now the ads our local clients are willing to shell out good money for are terrible. It’s like they don’t even try anymore. This chap Andrew, I am sure is a nice fellow so please let him be. No he’s not the classic creative leader sort but none of the current ECDs/CCOs in town are. Even the Indi shops are playing ball to keep clients stupid and happy. It is a depressing state of affairs when you see the actual work that runs in Singapore every weekend and this includes the retail spittle that flashes about online.
Now that clients are all rushing to the noise of Nas Daily and other Influencers regardless of their understanding of content marketing, segment targeting or basic omni-channel marketing we find the advertising industry even deeper in a hole. But to the topic at hand, I do take part of the blame as the account people chased the tough creative leaders away. I won’t name names for fear of being omitted because of [community guidelines]. I do say that our own fear may have misguided us and now there is really nobody left to stand up for creativity, we promoted the weakest to the top jobs by attrition. What we have now is a pool of very sad dweebs making work that is mostly parody of adland’s past. Hindsight is like that, but after reading some of the more inspired comments in this lovely thread I thought I’d just add to the murky chum.
ReplyI remember the ball partnership work. Incredible print work, smart, irreverent, and memorable. (Reminds me a little of Ben for some reason). I don’t know who the author named Neil is of this opinion piece above is from a bar of soap but I did find the piece a little condescending to the group of Mumbrella readers here. But I did know a Neil French, a man now lost in time but one of the best admen to ever walk the streets of Singapore. Talented, but [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines]. These were before the days of participation trophies and account people letting clients write their own headlines. If being a jerk brings back the strong creative work I’d welcome it back. Haven’t seen a decent headline in so long I forgot what one looked like.
ReplyAt his peak, Frenchie had assembled some of the most [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] on the equator….but it was a joy to see their output. The message and craft was all delivered with laser-like precision.
One of his ads for The Cakeshop at the Oriental (or Mandarin) said: NOW YOU CAN PICK UP TARTS AT THE ORIENTAL
(And the copywriter on that was a local Singaporean Chinese woman!)
Holy shit! Can you imagine the outrage that ad would stir up now from the righteous internet police?
Just saw and ad for Air Asia that said: “now you can get off in Thailand”.
These advocates of “niceness” have managed to get that out of circulation with their snowflake activism. Abyss, here we come.
ReplyThe good copywriters are all gone. The kids we have now are writing bloody retail rubbish and can hardly rub two sticks together by themselves let alone write a smart insightful headline. Neil French is a [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] man for sure. He’s old! Of course he is! But he can still think. And if you look at the awards given out now, to the Secret Little Agencies and the Goodstuffs we can’t really go on and say that’s a [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] standard. It’s the bottom of the barrel and we all know it. I do miss the strong headlines and the thinking. Agree with @Balls and @The Ball Partnership of so many levels. Weak CDs come by the dozen. It’s a sad time for adland.
ReplyBloody hell…what a cluster****
Just because one guy who wears suits misinterprets what ‘nice’
means in the context of a creative director.
So he thinks that when we (the ones in the trenches) say that nice doesn’t cut it without talent, we are advocating that it’s ok to be a nasty, mean, alcoholic, sexual predator….or all of the above.
Ive seen some twisting and turning on mSM these days but this takes the cake.
ReplySure, being ‘nice’ is well, ‘nice’. But everybody being nice is just as much an utopia as “how about nobody does any crime anymore”.
ReplyPeople are different and some people are assholes. Also, some assholes are talented at what they do.
I presume that a company goes for its best interest and sometimes that can be hiring a talented asshole. And just the same they will fire him if he becomes a detriment in any way, to the company.
What you got to ask yourself is that if you are seriously ill, who would you rather have on your case: an unskilled physician who is terribly nice, or the best doctor available who has bad bed-side manners?
Just read the story on art director Stuart Mills caught on video [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] a frail old security guard at a “nightlife venue” Roxy Square.
Doesn’t matter how good your layouts are…or how many gongs you won…this kind of [Edited under Mumbrella’s community guidelines] behaviour is disgusting and should be dealt with by the authorities.
He may be allowed to stay in SG, but in this case, any agency or client will hopefully choose nice over talented.
ReplyHave your say