Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US, Canada and the UK

DOUGCRS W E S T

Restricted Creativi tv: Rdvertising Rgency Uork Practices in the US, Canada and the UK"

INTRODUCTION Advertising agency creative staff are employed, permanently or on a freelance basis, to produce communications for out- side organizations. In contrast to artistic work, which is normally exhibited to, sold to or performed for the public, advertisements are targeted through selected media with the intention of modifying consumer or business behavior in some way. Be it to stay loyal to a particular brand, or not to drop trash, or vote for the Democrats, the product of agency creative staff is developed for and owned by the client. The same forms of communication a s art can be used, such as photography, film, drawing and music, but, it is business. This article investigates advertising agency creative work practices and examines the differences between business and artistic creativity in this respect. The approach is cross- national to provide a wider perspective on the topic: the advertising product of North America and the United Kingdom is widely viewed a s dissimilar (Nevett, 1992).

Before beginning the study proper, a brief overview of how advertising agencies, normally manage the creative process is required for readers unfamiliar with the process. There are two stages to advertising campaign development: what message will be communicated-the strategy; and how that message will be communicated-the execution. The management of the creative process in agencies is the responsibility of the Senior Creative Director (SCD). In large agencies, the SCD generally heads the creative department and plays an important role in pointing the strategy of many of the campaigns. Such agencies usually have several junior Creative Directors who oversee campaigns and report back to the SCD, who may also have an agency-wide administra- tive role, such a s President or CEO. In medium-sized to

'The author gratefully acknowledges the invaluable advice of: Sean Fitzpatrick (McCann-Erickson) in Detroit, Bernard Owett (J. Walter Thompson) and Susan Roessner (BRHEM) in New York. Thanks also to Alan Chan for his research assistance and to the Alberta Energy Corporation for the financial support.

Volume 27 Number 3 Third Quarter 1993 200

small agencies the SCD may solely direct every campaign strategy.

All agencies have copywriters and art directors to whom are delegated the responsibility of developing the creative execution. They frequently work in teams of two, are often hired and fired as a team, and may successfully work together for a number of years. Copywriters come from a variety of backgrounds, but are often literature graduates. Art directors are typically trained artists. Their roles are loosely defined- each may offer advice on the words, layout and pictures. They develop executional ideas for the client within the con- text of the defined strategy a s agreed with the SCD. The relationship between the SCD and their copywriter/art director teams is managerial, but there is an important mentor relationship as well.

Two central questions will be posed in this article. To what extent do these relationships and work practices differ cross-nationally, and, to what degree do they equate to the practices found among artists? The article begins with a brief review of the relevant literature on cross-national advertising and then examines the key creative issues to be investigated.

CAOSS-NATIONAL Comparisons of the output of advertisements of different countries are notoriously controversial and subjective in nature. Nevertheless, many professional observers of the North American advertising industry have argued that creative standards declined after the recession of the early 1970’s. During these years, and afterwards, many advertis- ers, often in leading positions, opted for less risky hard-sell approaches (for example, in the case of television commercials, an emphasis on the product and its packaging and loud-talking salespeople). This occurred just as UK advertising creatives were learning from some of America’s finest creatives of the 1960’s, such a s BiIl Bernbach (best known for the “Think Small” Volkswagon Beetle advertising of the early 1960’s). The so-called “new wave” UK agencies of the late 1970’s and 1980’s won and dominated numerous international advertising award ceremonies over this period (West, 1988). Since then, there have been numerous arti- cles in the trade press (most notably in Advertising Age) and academic studies (Weinberger and Spotts, 1989ab) compar- ing the irreverent, humorous, and “soft” UK approach to advertising to the hard-sell and aggressiveness of much of

20 1

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US, Canada and the UK

CREATIVE UORK PRACTICES

Uork Potterns and Flctivities

Erperience

North American advertising. Cultural factors play an important role here (Unwin, 1974; Andrews et al, 199 1 ), and in differences in the respective advertising industries approaches to advertising (Nevett, 1992). An examination of the extent to which creative practices differ between North America and the UK will be a valuable factor to explore.

There is considerable, if anecdotal, evidence that many creatives find certain work patterns and activities important to their work. For example, Alex Osborn, a leading American advertising executive of the 1950’s and 60s suggested that creatives needed to keep an open mjnd. H e recommended them to work in hotels or inns, or wherever, to escape the office routine ( 1963). He advocated sleeping, walking and/or lying down a s ways of gaining creative insights. Certainly, there is some narrative support for lying down. Einstein formed his time and space theory while sick in bed and James Brindley, a leading engineer, would take to his bed for days in order to solve a problem (Koestler, 1964). Similarly, on the artistic side, there are numerous examples of the importance of other kinds of work patterns and activities to creative thought. Emile Zola pulled the shades at midday in order to simulate the night (Stein, 1974); Ralph Waldo Emerson left his family and rented a hotel to gain soli- tary conditions to write (Haefle, 1962); Hemingway wrote in the mornings and spent the nights carousing (Koestler, 1964). Debussy and Beethoven needed nature to work. Schubert had a regimented schedule from 9:00 AM to 2:OO AM; Haydn rose a t 6:30 AM to work, and Berlioz and Beethoven worked all day and night, if needed (Isaacs, 1979). Such work patterns and activities may seem trivial, but, to the individual conkerned they often are an integral part of the creative process.

There is general support for the proposition that wide experience is a pre-requisite to creativity. DeGroot ( 1966) discovered that master chess players largely played from experience. They used their knowledge to determine the possible moves and how they should respond, likewise, Greeno ( 1980) revealed many experts solved creative problems from knowledge. Poincare ( 19 13) and Koestler ( 1964) argued that creative problem-solving normally involved com- bining disparate thoughts. Koestler went further than Poincare to explore ‘bisociation’: where previously unrelated ideas were combined. To combine in such ways, creative

c

202

Journal of Crealive Behavior

thinkers needed to draw upon wide experience. Weisberg ( 1 986) also demonstrated, with a series of practical puzzles, that knowledge and experience were potent factors in creative problem-solving. Advertising creativity commonly uses bisociation in order to produce innovative ideas (Marra, 1390). To do so, agency creatives need to keep up-to-date with a wide range of trends and tastes in society, particularly in the arts.

Several principal motivations have been identified among agency creatives in the literature, namely: competitive teams, awards and deadlines. Competitive teams are an important motivational issue. Research on student-based advertising ideas generally supported the assumption that increased numbers of creative alternatives enhanced the chance of finding the ‘best’ creative idea (Van den Bergh et al, 1983). However, the best idea could be the first or 300th idea. Agencies can increase the number of ideas by pitting creative teams against each other to work competitively on a client’s account. The issue is a controversial one in the advertising business because the SCD has to adjudicate a s to which idea “wins” and will be offered to the client. Awards and deadlines are another powerful motivation. Agency creatives, like artists, are often identified with their work, either by peer recognition or industry-standard awards such as the Cannes Awards. This often puts pressure on creatives to do their best (Fletcher, 1990). Deadlines may also play a role. For example, Rossini was known to leave all his composing to the last minute. His advice was to leave work “until the evening before the opening night” (Isaacs, 1979). The ‘tyranny’ of the deadlinz is an everyday occurrence for agency creatives as all creative briefs are given a set time limit.

Advertising agencies have unique organizational charac- teristics that do not always follow the more traditional management techniques used by industry in general (Kover , 1964; Evans, 1973). How should the mix of work patterns and activities, experience and motivation be led? Ogilvy ( 1 963) argued that a good agency executive should be a ‘father figure’ offering understanding consideration and affec- tion and should hire subordina s good enough to succeed by themselves. He further argued that no creative organization of any kind had produced a great body of work without being led by a formidable individual. Osborn (1963) commented that ideal creative directors would be both creative

Motivation

Motivation

P

203

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US, Canada and the UK

“pace-setters’’ and creative coaches, ideally cultivating the creativity of those around them and making it bloom. Above all else, he contended that SCD’s should feel a regard for the power of ideas. However, Taylor and Ellison (1975) argued that creative managers should not lead by example, but should concentrate on “igniting” the creativity in others. According to Fletcher (1988) too many SCD’s divided their time uncomfortably between producing their own creative work and running their department, “trying to do two jobs at once, they rarely do either consummately well.” One point of caution on this aspect should be noted. Kolb (1992) investigated 40 teams in manufacturing, aerospace and health services and found little correlation between managerial style and performance, so the impact of leadership may be generally overrated.

METHOD The data used in this study were obtained from a four page questionnaire mailed to 900 SCD’s by name, at 300 agencies each in the U.S., Canada and the U.K. in J u n e 1990. The instrument included items measuring attitudes regarding creative work patterns, experience, external constraints and management. Recipients were asked to pass on the questionnaire to the most senior creative person in the agency, if not themselves. The questionnaire was initially developed in liaison with six senior creative directors in a western North American city. Given the dominance and significance of large agencies in each country, a quota sample of top agencies was chosen in preference to a random sample. For the United States, the top 300 agencies were selected from Advertising Age’s 1990 listing of the top 588 and cross-referenced with the Standard Directory of Advertising Agencies. The UK’s advertising trade journal, Campaign, 1990 listing of the top 300 British agencies was used, cross-referenced with names and addresses provided by British Rate and Data (BRAD)-a media directory. It proved impossible to repli- cate this approach for the Canadian market, however, a s Canada’s trade journal, Marketing, publishes only the names of the top 100 agencies. So the top 100 were selected and cross-referenced along with a random selection of an additional 200 agencies from Canadian Aduertising Rates & Data (CARD)-the Canadian equivalent to BRAD.

A total of 303 completed and usable questionnaires were returned (U.S. 86, Canada I 1 9 and the U.K. 98). This provided a 34 per cent effective rate of response, together with

204

Journal of Creative Behavior

19 returned by the post office owing to changed addresses, and two inappropriately targeted at Media Buying shops. It was not possible to compare the Canadian respondents to their quota sample (as with the U.S. and the U.K.), given the use of a part-quota part-random approach. However, an analysis of U.S. and U.K. respondents showed no significant bias in terms of size of billings (see Table 1). Anonymity was built into the research design by.including a postcard to request copies of the results separately from the questionnaire. 93 per cent of respondents requested a copy of the results, suggesting that the study was of interest to them. The overwhelming majority of respondents were creative directors (US, 87%; Canada, 83%; and, UK 93%) with the remainder of the creatives in the role of either president, CEO or manager. Just under 80 per cent of respondents had ten to twenty-nine years experience in working in creativity, evenly apportioned between 10- 19 and 20-29 years (see Table 2). The results from the questionnaire are pre- sented in the tables and written comments are included in the discussion a s many interesting additional remarks were made by the SCD's on every question. However, it must be borne in mind at the outset, that while their comments add depth, they are anecdotal.

T R B ~ E 1 Breakdown by Size of Responding Agencies

Billings* Small Medium Large Total:

Note na = nc

u s Canada UK Sample Replies Sample Replies Sample Replies

% % % % % % [n=300j [n=86] [n=300j In=] 191 [n=300] fn=98j

49 51 na 50 78 77 25 22 na 34 15 1 1 26 27 na 15 9 12

100 100 na 100 100 100

available. ' *The following billings definitions were applied:

Size u s Canada UK (m) (m) (m)

Small $15-50 $1-10 21 -25 Medium $51-100 $1 1-50 &26-75

Large $10 1 -2600 $5 1 -200 276-375

205

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US. Canada and the OK

TABLE 2 Number of Years Worked in Creativity

Years

1- 9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40+ No Answer

Total

All Three n 35

113 118 30

2 5

303

DISCUSSION T h e work p a t t e r n s a n d act ivi t ies for c rea t ive teams w e r e extremely similar in all three countries. Table 3 shows tha t working o n creative problems in t h e morning w a s rated high- ly, o n a five-point scale , a long with working in t h e afternoon or evening, a n d working a lone a t t h e office. Drinking tea/cof- fee, working a lone a t h o m e , working in bright light, doing exercise , working a l o n e a w a y f rom h o m e a n d working in semi d a r k n e s s r e c e i v e d m e d i u m s c o r e s . L y i n g d o w n received very little s u p p o r t f rom all SCD’s, regard less of country.

TABLE 3 Work Patterns a n d Activities for t h e Creative Team*

working morning working afternoon working evening working alonefoffice drinking tealcoffee working alone/horne working bright light doing exercise working alone/away working semi-darkness lying down

All Three

mean * *

3.5 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 I .9

US Canada mean mean

3.4 3.7 3.1 3.1 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.4 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.3 2. I I .9

UK mean

3.5 3.2 3.2 3.0 2.9 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.8

*From 1 (low) to 5 (high). **Average of all responses.

206


The written comments attached to the answers for work patterns and activities were revealing. Nineteen SCD’s commented that it depended on the individuals and whatever “worked” for them, and left their answers blank for this question. However, many other SCD’s appended additional work patterns and activities that they found aided creativity. Having lunch or going to a bar was popular, and not being interrupted was a constant theme. Going for a walk, chang- ing desks and physically moving were often cited a s well. One agency pointed out that it kept the mornings free of all meetings and appointments to allow its creative teams to work without interruption. Keeping a note-book on hand at all times was a common suggestion because creative ideas could “pop up” at anytime.

Two proxies for “experience” were used in the survey- working at different agencies and working abroad. The effect of working at different agencies was overwhelmingly seen as positive with no significant differences between countries (see Table 4). Several SCD’s pointed out, in the written comments, that staying too long at one agency could make copywriters or art directors stale and limit their perspective, given that creativity is a multi-faceted activity. Furthermore, different modes of creative approach were needed for different corporations, so wider agency experience was seen to be helpful. One SCD commented that some people were “just outstanding” so that experience at different agencies was not important .

TABLE 4 The Effect of Working in Different Agencies and Countries

AllThree US Canada UK % YO % %

[n=303] [n=86] [n= 1 191 [n=98] Different Agencies:

positive 93 91 90 97 neutral 7 9 9 3 negative 0 0 1 0 Total: 100 100 100 100

positive 71 71 84 56 neutral 23 24 13 34

Total: 100 100 100 100

Different Countries:

negative 6 5 3 10

207

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US. Canada and the OK

The effect of working abroad was seen to be generally a good thing a s well, but, again, there were no significant differences between countries (see Table 4). There was some debate in SCD’s written comments a s to the choice of country. Major western English speaking countries were seen as helpful for writers, whereas places like Bangkok were judged to be “too easy.” By contrast, most respondents said that art directors could effectively cross countries and find challenges wherever they worked, given the visual nature of their func- tion. Others accepted that some countries were better than others, but argued that it was generally helpful to have expo- sure to other cultures. Overall, it was recognized that there were wide benefits to agencies from having staff with international experience.

The questions relating to the use of competitive teams, awards and deadlines provided some interesting findings and lively comments from SCD’s. Assigning more than one team to the same account (agency terminology for a client’s campaign problem), proved to be a widespread policy. Only five percent of SCD’s never did this, and there were no significance differences among countries (Table 5) . Judging from the written comments, the agencies that “often” assigned more than one team to the same acccount believed it was a positive and realistic way to work, and argued that competition was a good creative motivation. The main reason for doing so was safety. As the client only took the account to a mechanistic point, some agencies felt they needed to explore different routes to get to what the client “really” wanted. However, just under 50 per cent of agencies only used competitive teams “sometimes” and a further quarter “rarely.” These SCD’s commented that accounts needed individual responsibility and assigning more than one team to a problem diluted ownership and was not constructive. Most said they used it only when the time frame was short, the problem was particularly acute, or the client very important. One SCD who “never” used competitive teams commented that his/her agency had used it before, but with poor results. It was found that too much time was spent adjudicating between teams, and the losing team was always severely dis- appointed, even if the difference in the quality of ideas was marginal. Fbrthermore, one team might believe that the other team would win the brief early on in the process and lose confidence in their own abilities to win. Thus, the apparent competition for the best idea would become a sham.

208


TRBLE 5 Frequency of Use of Assigning More Than One Team to the Same Account

AllThree US Canada UK YO YO YO %

never rarely sometimes often always

Total:

[n=303] In=86] [n= 1 191 [n=98)

5 2 8 4 24 22 33 15 47 51 39 53 23 24 19 26

1 0 2 1

100 100 100 100

The effects of awards on advertising work were largely judged to be positive with no apparent differences between countries (Table 6). Many SCD’s commented that awards m a d e advert isements more original and competitive. Nevertheless, most SCD’s asserted that campaigns were never conceived in order to win awards-no particular style was “award prone,” so it was not a direct motivation. However, awards provided a powerful motivational force in other ways. Creative awards helped agencies win new clients, could boost a creative’s salary and supported the creative ego. One agency commented that it never entered its work for awards, but clients sometimes did on its behalf.

TABLE 6 Effects of Awards and Deadlines on Execution

Awards: positive neutral negative Total:

Deadlines: positive neutral negative Total:

AllThree US Canada UK % YO % YO

[n=303] [n=86] [n= 1 191 [n=98]

61 67 52 65 32 30 38 27 7 2 10 8

I00 99 100 100

64 64 58 71 25 24 30 19 1 1 12 12 10

100 100 100 100

209

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US. Canada and the (IK

Similar to awards, deadlines were seen to be generally positive to creative work with no statistically significant differences between countries (Table 6). A number of interesting comments were made by the SCD’s on this matter. Several SCD’s pointed out that it could be negative, if the deadline was too short. For example, a whole campaign idea should be given several weeks, but a spin-off idea might be completed satisfactorily in a few days. The personalities concerned also needed to be considered. Some teams needed the pressure of a deadline to get the work done, but others got “deadline pho- bia.” Consequently, the length of the deadline affected the choice of a team for a particular problem. Overall, the general opinion was that realistic deadlines focused teams and had a good effect in most cases, but short ones, in inappropriate circumstances, rarely worked well.

The approach to leadership indicated in the study was that the majority of SCD’s saw their role a s cultivating and igniting the talent around them, rather than leading by the example of their own work. Just over two-thirds of SCD’s rated “bringing out the best in their teams” a s their main managerial role with no significant differences between countries (see Table 7). Just under a fifth rated “to be a good practitioner” higher, and the remainder rated both options equally. The written comments indicated that the two roles were closely entwined. One SCD commented that you could not just be a “talker”, you needed to gain respect to manage. On the other hand, one commented that many SCD’s were “brilliant” practitioners, but hopeless at managing others. Overall, the result was a straightforward endorsement of cul- tivation rather than leading by example.

TRBLE 7 Creative Director’s Main Management Role

AllThree US Canada UK % % % %

[n=303] [n=86] [n= 1 191 [n=98]

“bring out the best in team” 69 72 67 69 “be a good practitioner” 19 15 20 20 both the same 12 13 13 10 no answer 0 0 0 1

Total: 100 100 100 100

210


CONCLUSION One result that has emerged from this study is that work practices were not significantly different between countries. This was a valuable line of inquiry to follow, but it seems unlikely that work practices can explain the differences in creative product between North America and the United Kingdom. As noted by Pollay ( 1986) advertisements tended to reflect a society’s cultural values, albeit in a distorted man- ner. It may well be that cultural differences, and the structure of the respective advertising and media industries, explain much of the observed differences in advertising. Of course, this can only be conjectured, because this aspect was not part of the research design.

Turning to the second part of the study, it appears that agency creativity had some similarities to artistic creativity, within a tightly controlled framework. Diverse work patterns and activities had a place, but the results of this study suggested that, in business, it was infeasible to be too eccentric in generating ideas. Nevertheless, SCD’s recognized the value of adapting and modifying office routines to accommodate the personal preferences of copywriters and art directors. In particular, there was considerable support for keeping the mornings free from interruption. While a variety of breaks in routine were sanctioned, allowing creatives to lay down was not one of them! Turning to experience, the values of working at different agencies and in different countries were used here as proxies for “experience” in general. Not surprisingly, the majority of SCD’s felt that such experience was positive in creative problem-solving. The issue of motivation also provided some interesting results. Assigning multiple teams to an accouni to generate an “ideas competi-’ tion” was a widespread practice. However, most SCD’s used this policy sparingly, and only when circumstances were judged to be appropriate -primarily when the time frame was short, the problem particularly big, or the client was very important. Creative awards were not seen to directly affect motivation, but once won, it was recognized that they could have a beneficial effect on personal remuneration and agency success in winning new clients. Deadlines for creative work could be troublesome for some creative teams, but were generally seen to work well for most of them. Finally, with regards to leadership, SCD’s largely saw their own roles a s mentors, cultivating the creative work of their copywriters and art directors rather than concentrating on their own work. Nevertheless, most SCD’s recognized that

21 1

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US. Canada and the UK

they needed respect to manage effectively. Hence, they often felt that they needed to demonstrate that they could produce creative advertising in their own right.

In summary, agency creatives were not strangers to such creative practices a s working all day and night to solve problems. Nevertheless, they were not eccentrics. Of the full range of artistic practices, they equated most to artists who worked with rigid routines, with wide experience, motivated by competition, monetary rewards, deadlines and had access to a mentor. The agency creative workplace is a business one. While it attempts to accommodate less conventional approaches to creativity, it is inevitably more restricted.

REFfRENCES ANDREWS, J. C.. S. LYSONSKI & S. DURVASCILA (1991). Understanding cross-cultural student perceptions of advertising in general: implications for advertising educators and practitioners. Journal of Aduertising. 20

DEGROOT. A. (1966). Perception and memory versus thought: some old ideas and recent findings. In 8. Kleinmtintz (Ed.) Problem Soluing: Research, Method, and Theory. New York: John Wiley.

EVANS, G. S. (1973). A comparative organizational analysis of advertising agencies: the effect of size on management style. Journal of Advertising.

FLETCHER, W. (1988). Creative People: How To Manage Them and Maximize Their Creafivity. London: Hutchinson.

FLETCHER, W. ( 1990). The management of creativity. International Journal ofAduertising. 9 (l), 1-37.

GREENO. J. G. (1980). Trends and the theory of knowledge for problem solving. In D. T. Tuma & R. Reif (Eds.) Problem Solving and Educafion: Issues in Teaching and Learning. New Jersey: Erlbaum.

(2), 15-28.

2 (I), 26-31.

HAEFLE, J. ( 1962). Creativity and Innovalion. New York: Reinhold.

ISAACS, A. F. (1979). Creativity in musical composition: how does the composer work?. The Creatiue Child and Adult Quarterly. Autumn, 152-7 1.

KOESTLER. A. (1964). The Act ofCreation. New YorkaVacMillan.

KOLB. J. A. (1992). Leadership of creative teams. Journal of Creative Behauior. 26 ( l ) , 1-9.

KOVER, A. J. (1964). Reorganizing in an advertising agency: a case study of a decrease in integration. Human Organization, Winter, 252-59.

MARRA, J. L. ( 1990). Aduertising Creatiuity: Techniques for Generating Ideas, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

NEVE'IT. T. ( 1992). Differences between American and British television advertising: explanations and implications. Journal of Advertising. 2 1

OGILVY, D. ( 1963). Confessions of An Advertising Man, New York: MacMillan.

OSBORN, A. F. (1963). Applied Imagination: Rinciples and hocedures of Creative Problem-Sluing. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 3rd Ed.

(4), 61-71.

212


POINCARE, H. (19 13). Mathematical creation. The Foundalions of Science. translated by G. B. Halstead). New York: Science Press. Reprinted in B. Ghiselin. (Ed.) (1952). The Crealiue Process, New York: New American Library.

POLLAY, R. W. (1986). The distorted mirror: reflections on the unintended consequences of advertising. Journal of Markefing. 50. 18-36.

STEIN, M. I. (1974). Stimulating Crealiuily, I , New York: Academic Press. TAYLOR, C. W. & ELLISON, R. L. ( 1975). Moving towards working models

in creativity: Utah creativity experiences and insights. In Irving J. Taylor & J. W. Getzels (Eds.) Perspectives in Crealiuily. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.

UNWIN. S. J. F. (1974). How culture affects advertising expression and communication style. Journal of Aduerfising, 3 (2). 24-7.

VAN den BERGH. G . B. L. N. REID & SCHERIN. G. A. ( 1983). How many creative alternatives to generate. Journal ofAduertising. 12 (4). 46-9.

WEISBERG. R. W. (1986). Creafiuity: Genius and Other Myths, New York: W. H. Freeman.

WEINBERGER. M. G. & SPOTTS. H. E. (1989a). A situational view of infor- mation content in tv advertising in t h e U.S. and the U.K.. Journal of Markeling. 53. 89- 94.

WEINBERGER, M. 6. & SPOTTS, H. E. (1989b). Humor in the U.S. versus U.K. tv commercials: a comparison. Journal of Aduertising. 18 (2). 39- 44.

WEST, D. C. (1988). Multinational competition in the British advertising agency business, 1936- 1987. Business History Reuiew. 62 (3). 467-501.

Douglas West, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N I N 4 Canada, 403-220-5685.

213

Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US, Canada and the UK

Documents

Transcript of Restricted Creativity: Advertising Agency Work Practices in the US, Canada and the UK