In its simplest sense, media-neutral planning means picking the best mediums for reaching the target – without any preconceived biases – before you start thinking about creative. Sounds simple, but it hardly ever happens. More than that, the term itself has become a flashpoint for debates on the role of the media agency in advertising and the future of media planning in general.

The U.K. is currently the epicentre for this little tempest, so Strategy

MEDIA contacted Richard Hartell, board account director for MediaVest UK and a man with some pretty definite ideas about media-neutral planning, to fill us in.

Right out of the gate, Hartell takes issue with the use of the term ‘media-neutral.’ He believes it’s misleading and suggestive of developing communications messages irrespective of where and when they are to be communicated.

In reality, he says, ‘media-neutral planning’ is ‘content neutral planning,’ a new spin on the old ‘media at the start of the process’ debate. However, the new term is a broader and more integrated version that defines media as any contact point with a consumer – for example, a 30-second TV ad, a letter, packaging, a shop window or an article in a magazine. It also suggests that the channels of communication, and consequently budgets, can be determined before the actual content is developed.

‘Both routes work within the paradigm of a divided and highly specialized communications industry,’ says Hartell. ‘The ambition for the industry should not be for us to be context- or content-neutral – or any other such phrase – but to break down the divisions between those who deliver the context and those who determine the content.’

Is media-neutral planning strictly a media agency function?

Hartell: It could be said that media agencies are best placed to carry out this function. Firstly, they have a broad and deep understanding of the lifestyles, attitudes and motivations of consumers. Also, from their historical core offering of traditional media buying, media agencies have already extended their expertise into DM, interactive and PR via sponsorship and editorial integration. Consequently, media agencies have the tools, expertise and capabilities to understand the relative values – both efficiency and effectiveness – of any contact point with a consumer.

However, this only considers the context side of the equation. For a media agency to really deliver effective communications, it has to re-engage with those who provide the content. This is not recommending returning to the old full-service model, since this reinstates advertising as king over all other channels. But it does require greater levels of fluidity between the media agencies and all the suppliers of the content of communication – advertising, DM, sales promotion, event organizers and packaging.

How can an agency implement media-neutral planning?

First it has to build on its knowledge across all areas of the marketing mix. This can only be done through its investment in people.

Media agencies have to reconsider the skill sets they require from their staff and recruit accordingly. This has started to happen more and more with a range of people with backgrounds in DM, PR, and online all coming into the fold. However, there is scope to open out more, with the next step being more account planners, qualitative researchers and business modelers also being recruited in order to provide an additional dimension.

Processes and tools are often just supports for good thinking. In many respects, these have served to create the barriers between marketing suppliers and the schism between context and content. The real issue is the change in mind-set that is required to move things forward.

What are the barriers and challenges?

The only barrier is conservatism. The industry currently defines itself by the way it divides itself – media, advertising, PR, sales promotions, DM, and communications.

Specialization has been a perfectly respectable, self-serving business model for a while but it has reached its limitations for both our clients and us and something new needs to be sought. The friction it causes is unfortunately rarely truly creative and frequently results in either confusion or compromise. The word ‘discipline’ in the term ‘marketing discipline’ sums up the rigidity that the industry has foisted upon itself.

Is media-neutral planning the next step in the evolution of media agencies from a commodity to a true marketing partner?

People often spit out the words ‘commodity’ and ‘big-media agency’ as though they were somehow unpleasant. Good buying, representing real value for the client’s money, does make a significant impact on a client’s business. The levels of savings that can be made on what is the lion’s share of a marketing budget directly and immediately impacts on a company’s bottom line. Seeking this level of efficiency should be a given.

The demonstration of effectiveness is more difficult, but is clearly equally important. The greater responsibility associated with a media agency extending its remit beyond the narrower definition of above-the-line media requires even more accountability than before. However, this will require investment into econometric modeling and the commitment from clients to move from commission-based payment to fees and results-based remuneration.

Is there enough client interest for agencies to make the leap to media-neutral planning?

I don’t think there is any question that agencies will move towards a new way of working. A ‘leap’ however, is probably a bit ambitious.

Paradoxically, the time when communications effectiveness becomes an even more precious commodity – such as during an economic downturn – is also the time when clients and suppliers become even more conservative and less prepared to invest in change. Therefore, this change will be a slow one with the delivery falling behind the rhetoric.

What changes in the marketplace have occurred to prompt the development of media-neutral planning?

From the client’s perspective, there are three factors. Firstly, the proliferation of media channels has meant it has become increasingly difficult for a brand to coherently communicate with a consumer. Secondly, specialization amongst marketing suppliers has made it more and more difficult for a client to manage the process. Finally, accountability of the marketing spend to the client’s business has elevated the importance of demonstrating return on investment.

Media agencies have recognized this and in the context of both client and agency consolidation, tighter margins and the divorce from the creative process, this change represents an opportunity to reinvigorate their role in the process.

How widespread is media-neutral planning?

There are pockets of this kind of thinking, and it’s not really that certain agencies employ it significantly better than others. It’s more that certain individuals or sets of people across agencies come together with an open client in a fluid relationship that results in good work. More often than not, a good client is the catalyst to this.

Also, because it is more a state of mind rather than a new ‘all singing and dancing’ technique, I am sure it has been around and about for a while. It is more of an undiscovered starlet that has been treading the boards for a while but has finally been ‘discovered’ by people desperate for a change.

How will media-neutral planning change advertising?

The term media-neutral planning won’t. In fact the more it is called this, the more it becomes a crutch-word that gets bandied around in meetings with the real meaning forgotten and nothing changes.

What the term should represent could begin to alter how we structure the business to do better work for clients.

On an individual level, it should stop people sticking to their knitting and start thinking beyond their ‘discipline.’ On an agency level it should result in greater levels of investment in the capital that will make a difference – that is, people that can turn their understanding of people and brands into great ideas that deliver results. For the industry, it should result in greater fluidity and co-operation between short-sighted ‘specialisms’ and the establishment of more and more generalist communications planning agencies.