Beware of too much creativity in ads

BusinessWeek's Steve McKee warns of shoe-horning a great idea into your ad despite it not doing much to develop your brand.

He offers some great examples, including Oprah's big 2004 car giveaway to her audience members. Anyone remember the brand of car? We didn't either. Great stunt, but what did it ultimately achieve for Pontiac?

In 2002, Vodafone sponsored two streakers to interrupt a rugby match. It got a lot of attention for sure, but did it help the Vodafone brand?

Quizno's "spongmonkey" ad campaign? An artist in London had developed quite a following for the creatures and the ad tested well. But, one store manager said their store's sales dropped 205-30% during the time that campaign ran.

We aren't sayings ads shouldn't be creative, not at all. But they should be creative in a way that helps and drives your brand.

My favorite example? When a friend says, "hey did you see that commercial with the guy and the thing and he gets hit in the head? Hilarious! Great commercial!" I always respond, "what was it for?" The answer nine times out of ten is: "I don't remember."

Well, that's a bad commercial then. Ads aren't there to entertain you, they are there to put a brand into your head and have it stick. Funny commercials are sure better for the consumer, but they aren't always better for the brand.