marketing & sales

ten keys to crafting ads

and why some ads don’t work.

by bruce marcus
professional services marketing 3.0

editor’s note: 卡塔尔世界杯常规比赛时间 was privileged to have a long relationship with bruce w. marcus, who was ahead of his time in his thinking and practice in marketing for accounting. we are publishing some of the late expert’s evergreen work, which retains wisdom for the present.

certainly, the current crop of ads tends to be better than the earlier ones, although we had such weirdies as “accounting is our passion.” (“passion” is the current fad word). i thought passion to serve clients is more to be desired. how many words will be wasted to explain the link between their passion and their ability to meet your need?

more: eighteen things advertising can do for your firm | how hard do you work to keep your clients? | when clients think they know marketing | how to put target marketing into context | everyone in your firm is marketing | accountants vs. lawyers: who wins the marketing battle? | professional services marketing requires flexibility
goprocpa.comexclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.

then there was “financial restructuring without the bitter aftertaste,” for a law firm. the copy’s ok, but the illustration of three executive with faces screwed up (presumably from the bitter aftertaste) looks as if they’ve been drinking doctored kool-aid. pretty inviting, isn’t it? a good rule is don’t try to be funny in public until at least six strangers, none of whom is related to you, laugh at what you’ve written. nothing sours an ad more than unfunny attempts at humor.

another law firm had a picture of a maze on one side of the ad, with the title “legalese” beneath it, and in the other side, a picture of a bright young lawyer (a real partner), and the caption, “practical advice.” the message is that you’ll understand what the firm is trying to tell you. surely, the firm has greater and more valuable expertise than that? isn’t being understood by clients a basic in the practice of law?

a more elegant and effective ad shows a large picture of a go board, with both white and black stones. the caption says, “finding the right balance between risk and reward isn’t easy. working with your law firm should be.” good ad, but when they say, “at winston & strawn our focus is results” (huh?), they move right back into the realm of obvious, lazy and wasteful copy writing. do they expect you to believe that other firms don’t focus on results? that’s missing the point. it also comes under the rubric of telling the reader what to think, without crafting the path that leads the reader to arrive at your intended conclusion. it comes under the “sez you” category, which means, essentially, don’t say it unless you can prove it. complex, but more of that in a moment.

an ad for an accounting and consulting firm shows a new yorker magazine-type cartoon in which three men are standing in front of a desk, apparently being interviewed. one is very tall and gangly. one is a button-down business type. one is a bald little man, barely able to see above the desk. the caption reads, “secretly, dave suspected that only one of the consultants would really fit in with his team.” but which one? and the copy, which is headed “need deeper understanding?,” gives no clue – nor does it in any obvious way link to the cartoon. strange.

it’s interesting to note that these ads no longer appear.

an ad agency that knows how to do it does the ads for jefferson wells, a finance and accounting firm. a big picture of a real person – full page. a caption – “pragmatism shows.” the copy then goes on to describe the fact that the woman in the picture has tackled multiple sarbanes-oxley engagements in the past two years, and has had 15 years of audit experience before that. this is a woman who obviously knows. the implication is clear – she brings experience and expertise and a pragmatic approach to your problems. another best of show.

will advertising distinguish one firm from another? not likely, unless, like ogletree, it’s advertising a specialty. nor, i think, is it necessary. just projecting a firm’s capability effectively will make it more competitive, and that’s enough. there are too many law and accounting firms who do essentially the same things to make it necessary to go beyond that.

the people who did the ogletree and jefferson wells campaigns are rare. generally, ads for professional services fall into two categories – the story and the boast.

the story ad describes a situation that demonstrates a distinguishing factor about a firm, or – without blatantly saying it – leads the reader to a point of understanding and the conclusion that’s responsive to the important question, “what do you want the reader to know, think or feel after reading the ad?” when this is accomplished, the ad is most likely to be successful. a good example of this is the jefferson wells ad. it’s impossible to not be drawn into the ad’s story, and to not grasp the firm’s expertise.

the boast is the self-serving ad that demands that you accept their claim, without offering proof. the “…we focus on results” is an example. similar ads in this category are those that talk of a firm virtue as if it was exclusive to the firm. there has been a rash of ads that boast of speaking plain english instead of lawyerese, or practical advice, as if these were exclusive virtues. the problem with boast ads is that they tend to be seen as empty promises. they tell no credible story, and in fact, the firms may do better to simply advertise, “we are lawyers (or accountants). we do good work.” (sez you.)

why do ads that seem well written sometimes not work? because they miss these points of advertising. because they attempt to merely translate somebody’s idea of persuasive talk into the ad medium, which can sometimes be like wearing a tuxedo to the gym.

but a product ad, to use the jargon of the ad business, pulls. a professional service ad informs. it will be rare, and perhaps serendipitous, that somebody calls you and says “i saw your ad and want to hire you.” it happens, but you can’t build much of a practice on serendipity. another significant difference.

how, then, do you measure results of a law or accounting firm ad campaign?

  • if the campaign is part of a larger marketing program, which it should be, you’ll ultimately see the effects in talking to prospective clients.
  • existing clients will also tell you, as either a compliment or a criticism, whether or not the ads square with their experience. (pay attention to clients.)
  • your staff – those people who are responsible for delivering on the promise the campaign makes – will tell you, loud and clear.

ultimately, if the campaign is a good one, it will be because your marketing people understand the process, and will carry it through to other aspects of your marketing. this means your practice will grow, even though you may not be able to specifically credit any part of the program.

advertising professional services is a humbling experience.

the foundation for an ad

at the same time, there are some basic advertising principles that are indigenous to all advertising.

  • know your market. not only who your prospect is, but what kind of service your market really wants and needs and is willing to buy, and what kind of problems they’ll look to you to resolve.
  • know your service, in terms of what the prospective client is willing to buy, not simply what you’re offering to sell.
  • every ad campaign should begin with a stated objective. again, “what do you want the reader to know, think or feel after reading the ad?” the objectives are not general, they are specific to each firm, each campaign, each ad. they dictate that the copy, and all other elements of the ad, are focused and relevant.
  • obviously, truth is basic. you don’t promise what you can’t deliver.
  • the purpose of a headline is to attract attention and to bring the reader to the ad. a headline that offers nothing to the reader in terms of either benefit or interest may effectively mask the cleverest ad, and one that’s offering the most useful service.
  • the text should spring from the headline, and follow through the promise it offers. it should explain and clarify the facts and claims. it should be a logical progression of ideas, covering all of the points you mean to cover, even if it’s done only with an illustration.
  • copy can appeal to the intellect and reason, or it can appeal to the emotions, or it can do both. ads work best when you clearly understand your market, and clearly understand how your service relates to the needs of that market.
  • the illustration should have some relevance to the text, or otherwise attract the reader to the text.
  • the ad usually ends with a logo and a signature for identification and impression, and sometimes also a slogan.
  • and again, every ad campaign, and every ad, should address the question, “what do we want readers to know, think or feel after reading these ads?”

writing the copy

the artistry of advertising lies in the ability to manipulate symbols and ideas in order to inform and persuade people. as in any art form, there are no rules that can guide you in doing this, except to list those factors that seem to work most consistently. and yet, remember, some of the most successful ads are those that violate the rules.

two universally accepted axioms are that an ad must be simple, and it must look and sound as if it’s worth paying attention to. and obviously, it must be complete – it must contain all the information you want to convey. these axioms – if indeed they are axioms – spring from the fact that few ads are successful when these rules are ignored. beyond that, clarity is essential. no matter how an ad is written it must be understood and easy to read.

there are some other guidelines that professional copywriters also find useful:

  • talk to the reader, the listener or the viewer. don’t announce, don’t preach. and don’t get carried away by words and lose sight of the message. “you” is better than “we.”
  • write short sentences, with easy and familiar words. you want the reader or listener to do the least possible work to get your message. even when you’re talking to very bright people, communication is of the essence, not language manipulation.
  • don’t waste words. whether you use three or a thousand words, make sure each is exactly the one you need. you’re not writing an insurance contract for lawyers. an ad is information and persuasion.
  • use the present tense and the active voice (“all professional copywriters have extensive experience in preparing material,” rather than “ … extensive experience in the preparation of material.”). if you do want a formal style it should be deliberate, and you should have a clear idea of why you are using it.
  • punctuate correctly. punctuate to help the reader, and not merely to follow specific rules. the less punctuation the better, within the bounds of clarity, but don’t be afraid to use it if it helps the flow of an idea. don’t be afraid to use contractions and personal pronouns, just as you would in chatting informally with a prospect. after all, that’s what you’re trying to accomplish in your ad.
  • watch out for clichés. they turn some people off. more significantly, people don’t hear them as they pass mindlessly off the tongue without bothering to visit the mind, and the point you’re trying to make is lost. (again, unless you’re doing it deliberately.) to be enthusiastic and exciting is to be well along on the way to being interesting.
  • humor is dangerous, unless you’re professionally funny. nothing defeats an ad like unfunny – and usually irrelevant – ad copy.

writing is not the manipulation of words – it’s the expression of ideas. words, grammar and punctuation, are merely the tools and devices we use to express ideas most clearly. to think of ad copy as a configuration of words is the same as thinking of a symphony as a configuration of notes.

why do ads that seem well written sometimes not work? because they miss these points of advertising. because they attempt to merely translate somebody’s idea of persuasive talk into the ad medium. because they don’t know that “you” is better than “we.” because they didn’t bother to learn the market.

and because somebody didn’t recognize that the art of advertising copywriting is not the art of literary writing. different medium, different art form.