State of Kuldmuna Digital and What To Do About It?
April 9th, 2009
Last weekend Kuldmuna awards were given out. Someone is going to be offended by saying this. Level of most of entries shortlisted in Internet design and Digital advertising categories were shamefully low. I know there have been better projects in Estonia during last year. How did this happen?
DISCLAIMER: I work in advertising agency myself. I have been working in advertising agency or online department of advertising agency for last 11 years. Good to remember when you work in advertising and feel offended by reading this.
Kuldmuna Is an Advertising Competition
This is the main reason. Kuldmuna is about advertising by advertising people. You can see it from the beginning. When submitting your project only names of project manager, copywriter, AD and creative director are asked. Same problem continues in the website and in the Kuldmuna book.
It might be surprising to some but in web projects there is much more. Frontend coder, backend coder and Flash designer are first to come into mind. With larger projects information architect, UI designer and UX designer might be involved. If nothing else please just add one field called Technical designer for these people.
Judging With Advertising Mindset
Entries get judged with advertising mindset. In worst case just by showing a screenshot or presentation of a site. Judges don’t always have time or possibility to click through the site. We are not even talking about checking code quality here. It ends up being a beauty competition.
Easiest way to win is to make full Flash site with flying stuff and sounds. Even better if you invent some new “innovative” navigation. This is sometimes done in purpose. Agencies do separate projects which are good in Internet sense. Other projects which are just done for winning awards.
Smart agencies have learned what to submit to advertising competition. Good online projects do not get submitted to an advertising competition. They won’t win anything anyway.
What To Do About It?
We had exactly the same problem in Finland. Solution was Grand One. We could do exactly the same here in Estonia – Our own online awards organized and judged by online people.
I am willing to invest my own time and money for this. I just need some native Estonian speaker to join me (I do speak Estonian, just suck at writing it).
Starting Steps
I already figured out name for the awards. I have discussed the name with Estonian colleagues and everyone approved the idea. Name of the competition would be “Au tööle!”.
To start things quickly Au tööle! Twitter channel was set up. Purpose of this channel is to have place which lists what online projects agencies are doing. Yes, there is pixel.ee but only some projects are submitted there. To add your project send a private tweet or email lisa@autoole.ee. Send the following info:
- Name of the project
- URL to the project
- Name of the company(ies) who created it
This solves another problem we have. Lots of projects get done without other agencies knowing about them. It is nice to know what other are doing. Please send recent projects. Do not spam with everything you have done during last year.
If Twitter channel becomes we could start giving out smaller awards. Once a month might be too often. Every other month is a good start. Winner would be chosen by three judges. New judges are chosen each time. Judges will come from different agencies and there should be at least one designer and one coder.
Beginning of next year would be the first gala. Up to here everything has been free. Companies submitting projects to main event would have to pay a fee. There should be one category for non-profits or bloggers where entrance fee is free. Categories would be:
- Best campaign
- Best online service
- Best design
- Best online ad (banners etc)
- Grand Prix
How Do You Feel About It?
What do you think? You think I am crazy? It will never work? You would like to help? One thing is for sure – something needs to be done. If you have any ideas or suggestion leave a comment (in english or estonian).
April 13th, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Hip hip hooray Hip hip hooray Hip hip hooray
Not only was the standard low this year but the whole judging criteria sucked (for internet related entries – I cant comment about offline).
We sent in an official complaint to ERAL when the finalists had been announced and their response showed a complete lack of respect for the (our) internet industry, lack of knowledge of best practice and most worryingly an attitude of denial that they got anything wrong when failing to learn from the jury’s recommendations and learnings from last years competition.
The only reason we entered (3 campaigns) this year (for the first time) is because we stupidly assumed that the recommendations from last year had been listened to (as we were told they would be).
We felt, and still feel, totally mislead by ERAL and dismayed by their offhand approach. We even asked for our money back! (they did not give it of course).
As far as I am concerned ERAL has shown they are not fit to judge internet or digital “marketing activities”. altex will not enter again.
Whilst we at altex 100% support a new competition I would like to see a meeting first (we could meet at altex office when we can hold 30-40 people comfortably) where we can discuss and hopefully agree the judging criteria (the entry form format basically).
Getting this right is key to the success IMHO.
Personally I would like to see not just additional scrutiny of technical elements but also an appreciation of creativity that goes beyond the visual image – in other words we should value great creative concepts, even if they they are technically simple.
Also I think its important (especially in these tough economic times and when the internet is sooooo measurable) that goals are mentioned and some results declared. For example if a campaign goal was to increase subscriptions by 100% over 3 months then did the activity achieve that?
I would not like awards to be won by technically brilliant activities if they failed to achieve the goals otherwise this might turn into a techie competition and that’s not the goal is it?
Results should matter.
So I think that its not enough just to sumbit a url and some names. More thought needs to go into the submission process.
But overall it a great step in the right direction and it gets the “thumbs up” from me.
Well done Mika – I hope you get the support you need to make this fly.
April 14th, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Mika, thumbs up from me too!
And Robin, I’d like to take part of that meeting!
Just one quick comment – is this possible to have just one competition where every aspect of online solution has taken into count and judged?
There are different competitions for best web codeing. There are competitions for best website designs. Competitions that measure the effectivness of campaigns (The Effie Awards). Competitions that look the online solution as advertisment… etc
Maybe when you try focus on everything, you are not focusing. Or these all could be different categories in one competition? Maybe there could even be a category for best usability etc.
Anyway, lots of ideas and thoughts already. Let’s go on and talk about it further! I’m in!
April 14th, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Hi guys,
I had some similar thoughts on that subject and blogged about it a week ago in here (in estonian): http://www.velvet.ee/blog/2009/04/07/kuldmuna-2009/
So you can count on Velvet’s support as well.
April 14th, 2009 at 04:04 PM
after 2008 awards as judges we were asked to give feedback. I sent an email around and I just dig it out. Here it is, unedited.
“My comments pertain mostly to the judging criteria.
Effective interactivity is dependent on success in 3 elements: content, design and technology.
It’s like a stool with 3 legs. It needs all 3 to stand properly.
The e-egg awards must change with the times.
Future entries need to be judged on:
content – does it serve the needs / desires of all the target audiences? have all opportunities been taken or missed? If content is king – and that’s why most people come to the internet “to find content”- then the awards should recognise that fact.
technology- has appropriate technology been chosen for the task? is the campaign/site accessible to all (in the target audiences)? does it work on mobile devices (increasingly important in Estonia)? Did all the emails get delivered? Is the site visible in Google? Etc etc.(clean code etc)
design – I leave the “pretty” factor for others (I am no designer) but for me this should not be a style award or it will lose all credibility with the e-agencies. It’s common knowledge that many agencies do not bother to enter high quality and effective interactive work because it’s obvious that “only pretty flash sites win”. The visual element is the most evident manifestation of design but design must also address information architecture/usability and accessibility – (can everyone see it on their machine without latest browser or Flash plug in?)
effectiveness – what were the goals of the campaign? what were the results? It’s no good being pretty or well publicised if you fail to deliver…
Also I think the categories should be widened but I am not sure how many are really appropriate for this awards as it seems, now, so obvious that there is a gap in the market for another “emarketing” award.
But anyway the categories I would like to see are:
interactive advertising (includes campaigns using email, search, banner, viral etc)
campaign microsite
company website
online film/video and games
..and perhaps special awards for
style
usability + accessibility
best use of new techniques e.g. web 2.0, google earth etc.
mobile compatibility
It might be worth someone investigating other international awards e.g. www.webaward.org , www.webbyawards.com
Dave Chaffey (a nice guy with a very helpful website) has a short list here: http://www.davechaffey.com/Internet-Marketing/C8-Communications/Online-campaign-examples/E-marketing-awards-sites/
Ref getting more quality entries:
I think that there should be more proactivity to encourage submissions ie if a good site/campaign hits the market then the owners should be invited to enter – they just might not be aware of the full opportunity (especially smaller agencies and companies).
I also believe there should be a pre-judging quality check.
Some of the entries were absolutely awful and I can’t imagine why they wasted our time or theirs.
A checklist needs to be put in place and if the entries do not meet the points then they are not entered and no refund.
If Estonia wants to get respect on the international stage for emarketing then the quality of the work needs to improve (generally speaking – of course there is some good stuff around –don’t take it personally anyone) and respect needs to be paid to the many specialists that make an e-campaign/site work –not just the PM and designer.”
I sent that a year ago. They took lots of notice didn’t they :)
April 16th, 2009 at 07:41 AM
Me again. I have just agreed to judge the 2009 web marketing awards http://www.altex-marketing.com/web-marketing-awards-2009 Their process is worth a look.
April 16th, 2009 at 08:58 AM
Isnt it right time for emarketing agencies come to together and make something like ERAL for emarketing agencies (EEAL = Eesti E-turunduse Agentuuride Liit)?
Ofcourse emarketing should be natural part of any marketing nowadays, but it seems to me, that there is a huge canyon between advertising way of thinking and emarketing way of thinking. They should be in same boat, but somehow they arent.
So i support any new initiative, which will rise Estonian emarketing level.
April 16th, 2009 at 09:14 AM
If you need somebody from the customer side, I can join the discussion on evaluation criteria. Hille, Riigikantselei
April 16th, 2009 at 09:24 AM
ADM agrees with Robin – again :)
And – let´s meet and discuss how to judge Estonian e-marketing projects better. It is obviously not too difficult to come up with a more adequate judging system for e-marketing projects than Kuldmuna.
We can also test if the Autööle idea works. Why not.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:05 AM
The idea to create “Eesti Digitaalmeedia Agentuuride Liit” (EDMAL) has already been discussed about 6-7 years ago. At that time several firms wanted to participate, but nobody wanted to lead it. Maybe the times have changed and now we will have enough energy to start it?
April 16th, 2009 at 10:41 PM
I very much support the idea too that results should matter! Great creative ideas were presented in Kuldmuna, but honestly, me, my colleagues, friends saw many of the adverts for the first time in life at that contest. How can it be a successful advert or campaign if nobody has ever seen it? In my opinion, clever customers ask for ROI and results. They want to earn back from advertising, let it be new customers, registrations, purchases, brand awareness etc or other goals, not just cool ideas. They want to be sure that their marketing funds are spent at the most clever way. Smart and efficient campaigns are worth an egg, especially in internet marketing where measurement is the king :)
April 17th, 2009 at 08:43 PM
Robin: I cannot comment on judging criteria because I do not know what they were. However I just know the shortlist nor winners (with two exceptions) were not that good. As I said in the blog entry I am not surprised at all about this. It is an advertising competition. I have seen the same thing happen all over and over again in Finland.
I like the content-design-technology-effectiveness square you described. Of course you still need creative idea etc. In the end it is all just how you name the qualities.
I do not however agree that you need 30-40 people to agree on criteria. So many people cannot agree on anything. All you need is small bunch of people who know what they are doing and are passionate and determined about it.
GrandOne people (all my ex colleagues and friends) have got it pretty much right at this point. So it would be good to look at their example.
April 17th, 2009 at 08:50 PM
Marko Saue: Good points. You’re correct there is a risk of losing focus.
Martti, Kaupo Kalda: What would be the purpose and goals of EEAL / EDMAL?
Jane Ild: You’re absolutely correct. That is one reason why entries should contain atleast some basic results and statistics.
April 17th, 2009 at 09:22 PM
Autsaiderite virin.
April 17th, 2009 at 09:45 PM
@mika I agree that “benevolent dictatorship” is better than slow-boat-cooperativism.
I also like to draw a line between desin and creativity.
Creative use of email or search might not involve great “design”. Semantics can cause trouble.
Creative use of modern technology to produce effective measurable results..
Grand One. Maybe. I could cite a number of others and have no experience of Grand One PLUS we must not forget the “need/desire” that the winners should be officially recognised and therefore ” go to Europe”. i am not sure easy that is to acheiev through a new org.
So ok maybe not 30-40 people but how about the people who have been bothered to comment on this post at least?
April 17th, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Meelis: You honestly think Kuldmuna finalists in digital categories represented the best what have been done in Estonia last year?
April 20th, 2009 at 08:00 AM
Meelis: Outsiders are the one’s who make stuff happen. Insiders are too content… This is has to happen as the ERAL awards digital part has been very advertising centric
April 20th, 2009 at 11:25 AM
I have put some additional comments here as i don’t want to be accused of over running Mika’s blog :) !
April 20th, 2009 at 03:25 PM
Priit: I actually feel Estonians can make things happen better than many other. You have this will do attitude. Us Finns have let’s form a committee attitude. Swedes have let’s diskuteera attitude. Maybe outsider was just needed to open the discussion.
Funny. I have never been called an outsider before…
April 20th, 2009 at 09:50 PM
Just to note that I agree with the critique regarding the Kuldmuna & ready to participate in any other contest, which considers all aspects of internet advertising.
April 21st, 2009 at 01:01 PM
Just a tiny academic point of view as well – I have long ago stopped demonstrating Kuldmuna web winners in marketing classes. I remember that it was 2004 (2003 winners then) when I accidentally opened some of the winners in front of the class (before viewing them myself) and had real trouble explaining what is this all about. So the least I’d be looking for is a set of decent best practice examples from Estonia.
May 15th, 2009 at 05:47 PM
Me again. I have just agreed to judge the 2009 web marketing awards http://www.altex-marketing.com/web-marketing-awards-2009 Their process is worth a look.
August 15th, 2009 at 12:53 PM
I sincerely hope this project hasn’t been layed aside since writing this post. It has great potential. So if you need a helping hand…
But I’ve got to say that the name…Au tööle? How did you come up with that?
Because – and I’m willing to explain my opinion more, if nessecary – the problem is that it has many very strong associations which can not be changed no matter how hard you try and all of them are the wrong associations… while there are no associations with the industry you’re trying to promote and motivate.
Maybe there is something to think about?
August 18th, 2009 at 11:40 AM
No it has not been buried. Competition is held in September.
And yes I do know what Au tööle means and where it comes from. It is intentional and was talked about with several Estonians who all agreed the wordplay aimed towards Soviet times is somewhat witty (and not offensive).
January 25th, 2010 at 02:36 PM
the great deal of discussion of late both here and in other forums about the blurring lines between advertising and editorial and the implications for both relationship building and sales and The problem I run up against is that the industry at which I’m ranting has spent the better part of the last century in a great completely different mindset. To them, the job was to reach more eyeballs, and success was measured in terms of how many eyeballs you reached.