Bartle Bogle Hegarty opened its doors in 1982.
Eight years later, Campaign voted them the agency of the decade.
Why?
Their work was considered, intelligent, and, in a decade often referred to as style-obsessed, BBH was the most style-obsessed.
But they also had something few agencies have today; swagger.
They had the confidence, or is it arrogance? to cut their own path.
Refusing to do creative pitches, turning down business and making challenging creative calls few agencies would make.
For example, on Audi, the created an end line only 5% of the population could understand – Vorsprung Durch Technik.
For a desperate to become relevant to a new generation Levi’s, they soundtracked their ads with music their parents would consider old-fashioned.
(Normal now, unusual then.)
And on the subject of female sanitary protection, which everyone knew had to be dealt with delicately, like defusing a bomb.
They risked it all, by boldly talking to women like human beings.
Their Dr Whites ads ditched metaphors, blue liquid and any mention of roller-skating.
Not only were these choices counterintuitive, they sold.
As they put it in their AAR reel ‘We don’t sell (fade to black) We make people want to buy’.
It was true, it was like they knew something others didn’t.
Brands that chose BBH in the eighties were sprinkled with some kind of fairy dust that made them desirable and often fashionable.
Since their launch, and for most of its first decade, John Hegarty worked writer Barbara Nokes.
Together, they created the three campaigns above.
The foundations of the agency. 
And one of their ads, Levi’s Black Sheep (below), remains as their logo and philosophy.
We cover this in the second part of my chat with Barbara.
Hope you enjoy it.

During my first year in advertising, a shiny new book turned up at the agency (Brooks Legon Bloomfield).
Weirdly, some in the creative department referred to it as 'the bible'.
It's actual name was The Designers & Art Directors Annual.
I was told it showed the best advertising and design from the U.K.
Although, also at this point, the U.K. arguably produced the best advertising and design on the planet.
This was the 1986 version.
The advertising featured was judged by 72 jurors.
Only 4 were female.
1 was Barbara Nokes.
315 advertising creatives had their work included.
29 were female.
Of those, Barbara Nokes had the most ads reprinted.

She was the 5th most successful creative overall. (14 entries and a silver).
I didn't think about whether she was male or female at the time, I just loved her work.
Always smart and punchy.
At the time, she was working with one of my favourite art directors; John Hegarty.
She's been top of my wanted for the last decade.
She finally relented.
Enjoy. 

To hear Derek tell it, his career was totally unplanned.
One impetuous decision after the next.
Leading to endless mistakes.
Exhibit A: Quitting the best agency in the country to go on holiday with his girlfriend. (CDP)
To me, it looks as meticulously pre-planned as any of the plots in the ‘Ocean’s’ films.

STEP 1: Work for the best agencies in town:
(CDP, BMP and DDB).

STEP 2: A reconnaissance trip to the States (Smith/Greenland).

STEP 3: Create financial security (Day/Devito-French).

STEP 4: Build a creative reputation at the most creative agencies of their day (WCRS and AMV).

STEP 5: Practice being a Creative Director at a big, bad agency (Ted Bates).

STEP 6: Now ready, you start your own shop (BDDH).

STEP 7: Position the agency as the first of a new trend (Third Wave).

STEP 8: Turn Marketers Directors curiosity about the Third Wave into retained business.

STEP 9: Sell.

Have a listen, tell me I’m wrong.

Being one, I'm very aware of my fellow double d's out there in advertising.
Dave Droga - met once, gave him a lift after judging D&AD together.
Donny Deutsch - never met, seen him on Morning Joe though.
David Denton - did a few ads with him at BMP, did Cointreau 'Ice melts', amongst many others.
Don Draper – never met, seems cool.
And Derek Day - less known than the first three, but well worth checking out.
I'd hear his quotes on a regular basis back in the early nineties.
My then writer, Mike McKenna, had worked for Derek twice, first at Ted Bates, then Butterfield Day Devito Hockney, and would regale me with 'war' stories.
I was new to the business, so ate them up, desperate for clues on how it worked.
Mike's most repeated was a version of this - "I showed him our campaign for (insert various campaign names here)...Derek pulled a face, like a bulldog chewing a wasp, pull a face, then said (insert various clever critiques here)... and the scales fell from my eyes”.
In a sea of dumb, crass ads, Derek's work always seemed clever and considered.
Often not criteria that wins big awards.
They tend to go to flashy and different.
If I had a brief and wanted to win an award, quite a few writers spring to mind, if it needed help to my family business grow, Derek's would spring to mind.
Looking at his career, there's a whiff of Zelig* about it. (*You’ll have to google it, soz.)
Hired by Alan Parker to work at the best shop of the sixties - Collett Dickenson Pearce.
Hired by John Webster to join arguably the best shop of the seventies - Boase Massimi Pollitt.
(In part 2, we find he was also hired by David Abbott to join arguably the best shop of the eighties - Abbott Mead Vickers.)
Then onto Doyle Dane Bernbach.
Smith/Greenland in America, under futurist Faith Popcorn.
Back to Blighty to become Creative Director at 25.
Setting up a Cramer Saatchi-like creative consultancy for seven years, earning a ‘Seymour’ when Geoffrey was still in short pants. (Again, I refer you to google.)
Then taking a 75% pay cut to join new agency Wight Collins Rutherford Scott in an attempt to win creative awards.
And that’s just part one.
We had a great chat, hope you enjoy it.

You can count the number of Creatives who embrace research on one finger.
The rest of us desperately try to fight it with lines like 'you can't research original ideas', 'the group gets lead by its most vocal member', 'the public can only judge finished ads, not research material', and on and on.
Good arguments.
But the argument against is better - John Webster.
Once delivered, it's hard for us sceptics to know where to go.
He loves research.
He does the best work.
So why did he embrace it?
How did he use it?
And why doesn't everyone who loves his work follow his lead?
I asked these and more to Sarah Carter, Adam&Eve/DDB Global Planning Partner, who worked with John as his planner for over fifteen years and who knows how many ads.
Hope you enjoy it.

British advertising may have had more successful businessmen.
More accomplished creative directors.
Bigger award winners.
But never a better Creative.
No one has more ideas living in British people’s heads than John Webster.
They didn’t gatecrash either – they were invited in.
Singing and dancing their way past the barriers and into the national consciousness.
One big, happy conga line; Smash Martians, Cresta Bear, Honey Monster, John Smith’s Arkwright, the Prize Guys, the Humphreys, and on and on.
Born across four different decades.
Created, unlike other ads at the time – alone and using research.
Occasionally John and a writer are credited, but primarily John was both the art director and writer.
At the time, Bernbach’s 1+1=3 was the law, so that was very rare.
Rarer still, were Creatives who embraced research.
Creatives viewed it as a killer of creativity and innovation.
I thought I’d look into these aspects of John’s process.
First, by talking about how John created ideas.
Fortunately, Dave Trott broke his anti-podcast rule, which is great, because I couldn’t think of anyone better to talk to on the subject.
Dave worked with John through the seventies and is obviously a brilliant Creative in his own right. (He’s not just a blogger kids.)
Next, I’ll talk to planner Sarah Carter about how John used research to shape ideas, but first, here’s Dave…

If you’ve ever wondered how reliant creatives are on their producers, count how many are married to them.
Lots.
Including me, my two creative partners at Campbell Doyle Dye and dozens of friends. 
Psychologists say we seek qualities in a partner we don't have ourselves.
To create more complete children.
So right brainers, who come up with the theories, need left brainers to help turn them into reality.
Yvonne Chalkley has turned more crazy, impossible, can’t-be-done theories into reality than anyone.
After watching her ads, you could be forgiven for thinking each came with a blank cheque for production and a guarantee that the creatives had final sign off.
Obviously, neither were true.
How you navigate between the differing demands from the client, agency, film production company and creative team I don't know.
Don’t compromise and the script may not get made.
Compromise too much and the script and it may not be worth making.
And here’s the really weird, spooky thing - I can’t find anyone who’s ever heard Yvonne raise her voice.
Or say no.
I asked her to explain.
(She said ‘yes’, obvs.)

This is the first episode edited by Parv - thanks Parv! 
(What were the other guests- chopped liver?)

Imagine a day where you don’t own a computer, and you lose your phone just after breakfast.

We used to live like that.
Every damn day.
With virtually no access to information.
Researching how to be better at your job wasn’t a thing.
Advertising people didn’t do podcasts or post articles about their work.
True, there were books, but not many.
Aside from awards annuals, the main two were ‘Ogilvy On Advertising’ and ‘Bill Bernbach’s Book’.
Occasionally you’d photocopy an article from Campaign, Creative Review or Direction magazine.
Dave Trott’s ‘How To Get Your First Job In Advertising’ was the most useful.
I had a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy.
The text was so faded and broken up it looked like an old religious document.
Which it was in a way.
It’s still great. (I’ve attached a copy below.)
Later, The Copy and Art Direction Books turned up.
They were a revelation – good creatives explaining how they create.
(If you haven’t read Richard Foster’s piece do, you’ll be a 9% better writer after reading it.)
We have the opposite problem today; too much.
But it leads to a kind of inertia.
A bit like living next to St. Pauls, you put off visiting, because you think ‘it’ll be there tomorrow, next week, next year’.
The other problem is who is or isn’t worth listening to?
LinkedIn if packed with people aggressively telling you exactly how to create ads as good as the ones they… like.
At the other end of the spectrum are people like Dave Trott, George Tannenbaum, Brian Burch, The Behind The Billboard guys, Rory Sutherland, Ben Kay and many more I’ll be embarrassed tomorrow that I forgot to mention.
And Steve Hudson.
He posts a series called The Power Of Advertising on LinkedIn where he breaks down his (and Victoria Fallon’s) ads from nose to tail.
From brief to air.
What’s great about it is the work.
A lot of teams have a style or preference, Steve (and Victoria) don’t.
At least, not that I can spot.
What links Audi to Anti-Smoking to One To One to Levi’s to Kingshield other than they’re all great?
The weirdest thing about our chat was realising how short their creative career was.
10 years.
They took it very seriously, which lead to some great work, but maybe some bad decisions too.
Hearing about Steve’s career was a bit like watching a horror film.
Instead of shouting ‘LOOK BEHIND YOU!’ I was shouting ‘DON’T RESIGN TO HEGARTY!’ or ‘STAY AT ABBOTT MEAD!’.
Anyway, it was a great chat, hope you enjoy it.

Creating is different to managing.
Creators try to break rules, managers set them.
Creators look inward, managers look outward.
Creators are introverts, managers are extroverts.
Not 100%, but most, AMV/BBDO once Myers Briggs tested their creative department.
The results came back - fifty people were rated ‘I’ (introvert), one was ‘E’ - the creative boss (Peter Souter).
I’s are ‘more likely to be successful in careers like writing, science and art’.
Makes sense.
“I’s are predominantly concerned with their own thoughts and feelings rather than with external things. Give an extrovert a problem and they’ll share it with others, give it to an introvert and they’ll ‘go into a cave alone to solve it’.
(Try finding a cave these days. In Soho. Nightmare.)
Today, creatives are often described as being “on the spectrum”.
Whether their diagnosis is right or wrong, it's true, our brains are wired differently.
It's fine when they need someone to look at a problem from a new angle.
More difficult when they need someone to play the role of manager.
That dark, cosy cave is swapped for bright, stranger-filled boardrooms.
Primarily to pitch, possibly the furthest distance from that cave.
You may be told to ‘have chemistry’ with six strangers from the world of moist wipes.
Or to present your funniest ‘jokes’ to some folks about to spend £6m persuading the public that their product has isn’t a cake, as its name suggests, it’s actually a biscuit.
It’s an adjustment.
Some adapt quicker than others.
I found it tough.
In the early days of CDD, clients having just left after a pitch, Peter Mead looked up at me and sighed “You should’ve seen David Abbott present creative work”.
Heartbreaking.
What did Abbott do?
How did he present?
I’d love to have seen him present creative work.
But agencies rarely invest in training or mentoring, they lob you in and hope you can swim.
It's like telling a footballer to “Put this helmet and shin pads on, you’re now a Cricketer’.
How do you make that transition less record scratchy?
I thought it’d be helpful for those about to go through it to have a bit more understanding of where they're headed.
To do this, I managed to pin down someone who knows more about pitching than anyone else; Martin Jones.
He’s sat on both sides of the table - he ran new business at the biggest agency in Britain at the time; J. Walter Thompson,
then ran the biggest intermediary in the Country for the last thirty years; The AAR.
Personally, he's run over a thousand over the last thirty years.
It’s meant that he’s seen every agency and senior person pitch.
I’ve known Martin since Arsenal’s Invincibles team, over the years he’s given me endless advice, but hearing him talk about his experience was a revelation.
If you have anything to do with new business; listen, you’ll be better at the end.
Hope you enjoy it.

Whatever happened to funny ads?
Have clients stopped buying them?
Or have agencies stopped writing them?
They used to dominate the ad breaks.
Humour was the first tool you reached for after being handed a brief.
Why? Well, as that Poppins women says ‘A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down’.
Actually…did they dominate ad breaks?
Maybe I’ve slipped on my rose-tinted specs again?
I reach for an old D&AD Annual.
Randomly, I pick up 1991’s.
34 tv and cinema ads featured; 28 were funny.
Of the 28, the most awarded were for Barclaycard and Red Rock Cider.
They feel slightly odd today.
They aren’t ‘advertising funny’, they’re actually funny.
In a way that I can’t imagine them popping up between Bake Off?
I don’t know whether it’s because they don’t take the product very seriously? Some even make fun of it. (Imagine; making fun of the very people who pay the bills?)
Or maybe getting bigger laughs than the programmes that surround you feels like bad form?
Like you have aspirations above your station.
I decided to do a bit of rudimentary desk research, discovering that humour is still surprisingly popular.
The public love it, apparently.
Much preferring it to being lectured to or bullshitted.
So why the lack of funny ads?
Even ad testing companies are urging us to produce more.
(Yes System 1, I’m talking about you.)
In an effort to better understand this humour thing, I went straight to the Chairman of the Board, the Grand Fromage, the Capo di Tutti Frutti – John Lloyd.
Not only did he shoot both the campaigns above, he’d spent two decades beforehand producing the funniest stuff on tv, including Not The Nine O’clock News, Blackadder and Spitting Image.
We had a lovely chat, hope you enjoy it.