\n<\/p>\n
There is much angst about the state of advertising. Various commentators in the industry and in the general media have bemoaned a creativity crisis, which is attributed to everything from short-termism to artificial intelligence to the fragmentation of media. There is some evidence that advertising\u2019s persuasive power has declined in recent years. It is less clear that this decline is attributable to a lessening of creativity in advertising. If advertising fails to deliver results, the impulse in many organizations is to blame the message, the media plan, or the marketing team. But the message is constrained by the availability of persuasive content. A more likely reason for the apparent decline in advertising\u2019s effectiveness lies not in the advertising but in the product itself. Advertising can communicate value, but it cannot create it. When a product does not meet a genuine customer need or lacks a compelling point of differentiation<\/a>, the most creative and expensive campaigns will fail. Ineffective advertising is often a symptom of a deeper product problem-a lack of innovation, product improvement, or response to changing customer needs.<\/p>\n This article is part of Branding Strategy Insider\u2019s newsletter.\u00a0Join the world\u2019s smartest marketers and subscribe here<\/a> for\u00a0actionable insights delivered directly to your inbox.<\/em><\/p>\n In its most basic form, advertising is a promise. Effective advertising communicates why a product matters, how it solves a problem, and why it is better than alternatives. If the product provides no basis for such a promise, or the advertising makes a promise that the product cannot deliver, no amount of creative messaging and media spending will compensate<\/a>. As is the case in most of life, no amount of spending will turn a poor decision into a good one.<\/p>\n Examples of this problem are not difficult to find, but to protect the guilty, we will not name the offenders. One example comes from the early days of many direct-to-consumer startups. Some firms invested heavily in digital advertising\u2014polished social media campaigns, influencer partnerships, and efforts at \u201cbranding\u201d\u2014only to see customer acquisition costs skyrocket without corresponding retention. In many of these cases, the issue was not poor advertising messaging but weak product-market fit. Customers would try the product once in response to compelling ads, but they did not repurchase because the product failed to deliver sufficient value. Advertising created awareness and trial, but it could not manufacture value and satisfaction. In such cases, the advertising was actually successful.<\/p>\n The history of consumer technology offers similar lessons. Consider the launch of early tablet devices before the widespread success of modern tablets. Several companies introduced tablet-like products with significant advertising support, but sales did not follow. The problem was not that consumers were unaware; rather, the products were too expensive, were difficult to use, or did not solve a compelling problem. When a later entrant refined the product\u2014improving usability, app ecosystems, and design\u2014the same product category suddenly and miraculously bourgeoned. The differences in market response were related to meeting user needs. The advertising was better, or more effective, too, but that was because it delivered a compelling message about things customers value<\/a>.<\/p>\n Consider the automotive industry. When a car model receives heavy advertising but suffers from reliability issues or uninspired design, sales often disappoint. Creativity may also be a problem, but it is creativity focused on the product that is the problem. If a product fails on key attributes that consumers value, advertising may drive initial showroom visits, but it cannot close the sale. Conversely, vehicles that excel in quality and value often benefit from strong organic demand, with advertising serving to reinforce rather than drive demand.<\/p>\n The basic principle transcends industries. Restaurants and packaged food brands may invest heavily in promotion, offering discounts and running high-frequency ads. Yet if the taste, quality, or consistency of the product is lacking, customers do not return. In contrast, brands with exceptional products often grow through word-of-mouth and customer loyalty, requiring less aggressive advertising over time. In these cases, the product itself becomes a powerful marketing tool, and advertising becomes effective by communicating the value and benefit of the product.<\/p>\n From a strategic perspective, this principle aligns with the concept of product-market fit. When a product truly satisfies a well-defined customer need, marketing becomes easier, more efficient, and more authentic. Messaging resonates because it communicates genuine value. When there is a clear basis for preferring the product over others, consumers are given a basis for choice. Customer acquisition costs decline as word-of-mouth increases. On the other hand, when product-market fit is weak, or there is no compelling product difference to inform consumer choice, companies often try to compensate by increasing advertising spending or by experimenting with creative advertising executions. This rarely works; it treats symptoms rather than addresses the root cause. The money spent on advertising might have greater impact, or any impact, if it were devoted to product innovation<\/a>.<\/p>\n This is not to say that advertising never fails due to execution issues. Poor targeting, unclear messaging, or ineffective creative can certainly undermine performance. However, when multiple campaigns, channels, and messages fail to produce results, it is a strong signal that the problem may lie deeper. In such cases, organizations should shift focus from \u201cHow do we say this better?\u201d to \u201cDo we have something worth saying?\u201d<\/p>\n As a marketer, your job is to compete. Compete differently with The Blake Project.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Creative advertising, even advertising that wins creative awards, cannot compensate for a bad product, but a great product can make advertising almost effortless<\/a>. Companies that recognize this distinction are better positioned to allocate resources wisely\u2014investing first in creating real value for customers, and then in communicating that value effectively. When advertising is not working, the most productive question may not be about advertising and other marketing tactics, but about whether the product itself is worthy of marketing investments.<\/p>\n Contri<\/span>buted to Branding Strategy Insider by Dr. David Stewart, Emeritus Professor of Marketing and Business Law, Loyola Marymount University, Author, Financial Dimensions Of Marketing Decisions, <\/a>and Chairman of the Marketing Accountability Standard Board.<\/p>\n At The Blake Project, we help clients worldwide, in all stages of development, define and articulate what makes them competitive and valuable at pivotal moments of change.<\/span> Please email us<\/a> to learn how we can help you compete differently.<\/em><\/p>\n Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project<\/a>: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Growth and Brand Education<\/p>\n FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n