the ultimate online exercise system!

Logically, a company marketing itself across multiple territories should attach equal importance to every piece of marketing documentation (digital or printed) published in its name. Alas, nowhere does our simplistic understanding of language show more starkly than in our treatment of centrally managed marketing material.

The perception of the relative value of a piece of creative work differs depending on who commissions it, the progress of the creative process, but above all, where it is published.

This is where many centrally managed projects fall down: while the initial concept is taken increasingly seriously by senior management as it is developed through to final concept and board approval, once it is released for publication in overseas territories, central interest in the execution rapidly wanes.

This is due to a very simple – but flawed – assumption. That the translation phase (an integral part of all centrally managed advertising or marketing campaigns) is merely a formality. All the serious work has been done, the concept has been devised, hours of creative toil have taken place – in short, the edifice is complete.

Of course experienced international managers know this is far from true. Transferring a concept from one language – or culture – to another is far from straightforward. Even, funnily enough, when the concept itself appears to be perfectly straightforward. And yet this flawed assumption still dominates at international marketing level.

Ironically, of course, the moment when the translated material enters the local market is precisely the point at which local interest in the concept starts to grow. Often the local office has only ever seen the concept in English – and may not even have seen a final version. The intentions underlying the concept may have been explained in some detail – but until they actually appear in solid, sweaty, readable language, they are abstracts, easy to approve in principle.

Once translated versions arrive – ah, then the disagreements and recriminations begin! “This isn’t what we want – doesn’t say what we thought it did – sounds insipid, unsuitable, stupid, rude – doesn’t do justice to the brand/product/service/company…”. Why is this?

There is a yawning gap in the perception of the relative value of the creative execution between the point at which it is signed off by Head Office, and the point at which it hits the local (in-territory) marketplace – which is when, for the local market, the execution’s value has reached its zenith. The series of diagrams that follow attempts to highlight this discrepancy in relative values (do contact us if you’d like the full-size presentation):

In the graphs, the dark blue line shows the value of the execution as perceived by Head Office, the orange line its value as perceived by in-territory management.