Kapero

We just learned that the top episode 2024 of one of the top marketing podcasts features Kapero. What a lovely Christmas present! Thank you to the brains Marc Binkley and Vassilis K. Douros behind the excellent show The Sleeping Barber Podcast. In the episode, Kaj Johansson of Kapero, together with Hanna Riberdahl of Sveriges Annonsörer, summarises how to shape your marketing department for the future in the comments. 🎧 Link to the episode in the comments. 📖 You may also download our report mentioned in the episode. Now you know what to do when the holiday spirit feels a bit too intense. #marketing #CMO #strategy #advertising

We are immensely proud that Resumé has listed Kapero among those who have influenced the industry the most in the last ten years.    The motivation reads:  ‘With wisdom, foresight and diligent work, they drive the question of how to - and should not - build a marketing department. Has contributed to many more efficient - and better - processes among companies in the communications industry!' All of us at Kapero blush and thank Resumé for this recognition and all of our clients and partners who have helped us develop and grow over the years. We will never give up in our quest to ensure our clients get the best possible business impact from their marketing budgets! Read the full list here: https://lnkd.in/dwiHrdc7 #marketing #communications #advertising #strategy #CMO #CMOinsights

Kan AI vara kreativ? Skulle Chat GPT till exempel kunna skriva manus till ett avsnitt av Succession? Och kan AI verkligen bli ett hot mot kreatörer? Det frågar sig Robert af Klintberg Ryberg på Kapero.

Den Store Annonsørdagen er over for denne gang! Det ble som vanlig en tettpakket dag, full av kunnskap, tips og inspirasjon 🔥 Tusen takk for inspirerende, lærerike og oppsiktsvekkende foredrag fra Louise Kloster, Phil Cowdell, Kristin Øygarden, Gard Steiro, Behnam Farazollahi, Kaj Johansson og Peter Lundberg 👏🏻 I tillegg til et stjernespekket lag av eksterne foredragsholdere, hadde vi flere av våre egne på scenen. Håvard Kvernaas Bakken presenterte årets DSAR som vi vet at mange har ventet spent på. I tillegg presenterte Sebastian Haarbye det omfattende analyseprosjektet Effektprosjektet, og Fredrik Pettersson ga oss en fersk AI oppdatering med foredraget AI; Fra science fiction til virkelighet! Hedersprisen Årets foredragsholder 2023-2024 ble også delt ut, og det var Mussa Dagnew fra Lyse som mottok den gjeve prisen 🏆 Jan Morten Drange har skrevet en full oppsummering av DSAD på anfo.no for den spesielt interesserte 🔗 Vi ses igjen på DSAD 2025 🙌🏻

In-house agency reality #2 Speed: “In-house agencies are faster than downtown agencies”. The lead time of working with city agencies can make it difficult to be agile and take advantage of marketing opportunities. Having the resources in-house can allow for quick and flexible action and suddenly these opportunities can be seized. However, the ability to initiate communications on the fly has its drawbacks: ⚠️ Quickly realised opportunities end up creating and producing a lot of unnecessary stuff. In other words, you waste resources and suddenly in-house is no longer as cost-effective. Does it sound good to be able to do more? Then you must understand that everything that is produced displaces something else. In other words, opportunities take precedence over strategic importance. More activity also means less creative power for each creation. And there are many other disadvantages of fragmentation. Read more here https://lnkd.in/dbb_An9p ⚠️ Being opportunistic takes your messaging away from the stamina, consistency and long-term focus that marcom needs to be effective. ⚠️ The ability to start quickly means that stakeholders brief later. And we all know how bad that is in terms of cost, creative output - and stress! Although having a fast-moving in-house agency – sticking to a long-term plan is a good idea for both communication results, cost efficiency and the staff's mental health. But that is, for many reasons, much harder for an internal department to do, and you need to implement a more structured set-up than a commercial agency downtown needs to do. 👉 Looking at shaping your in-house agency for the future? Here are some fundamental questions to help you enter that journey: https://lnkd.in/dPiaHyND Also, check out the other parts of this in-house reality show to grasp the pros and cons of in-housing: #1 - Cost savings https://lnkd.in/gbRmxVMJ #3 - Proximity https://lnkd.in/dBa5BcZR #4 - Control https://lnkd.in/dEBJxhFK #5 - Competence https://lnkd.in/d_Z6d-jq #6 - Focus https://lnkd.in/dYvm9dHy   #marketing #inhouseagency #advertising #CMOinsights #CMO

In-house agency reality #3 Proximity: “It is so good to have the agency close by” Having creative staff close at hand makes it easy to commission new marketing activities, provide input on creative during the process and generally oversee the process - things that make business stakeholders love having the creative agency in-house. But is having creative staff close at hand always good for the effectiveness of marketing investment? Is it good for the creative team? Here are some typical drawbacks to what intuitively seems so positive about having an agency at arm's length: 🔴 The CMO focuses on the details of urgent and fun communications and loses sight of the strategic perspective. 🔴 Creatives can't say no to work. They either become grumpy naysayers or overproduce. 🔴 Sloppy briefs. Coffee machine briefs are the norm with the agency across the room. They tend to be light on detail, leading to frustration on both sides and lots of costly changes. 🔴 When it is too easy to check in or become part of the creative process, opinions and changes become a blizzard. Bad for personnel, budget and impact. 🔴 Because the creative people are "just" part of the staff and usually below the stakeholders in the hierarchy, it is hard for them to build trust. This makes it hard to be a good marketing consultant. 🔴 Because anyone can drop in and ask for what they want, anyone can have communications material produced at any time. This distracts from strategic plans and leads to overproduction.  🔴 In the spirit of internal fairness, the agency has to help everyone: "The other department got a campaign last week. Now it is our turn". Some try taking measures, but few succeed: internal fees, new briefing templates, systems and super-strict guidelines. Or even moving the in-house agency further away from the client. ❗The way to approach this is to design your agency structure based on your needs and processes rather than on possibilities. Then, the role of the in-house agency will come naturally and create less friction for everyone. Here are some fundamental questions to help you enter that journey of improving your in-house agency situation: https://lnkd.in/dPiaHyND   Also, check out the other parts of this reality show: #1 - Cost savings https://lnkd.in/gbRmxVMJ #2 - Speed https://lnkd.in/dvEZa5UM #4 - Control https://lnkd.in/dEBJxhFK #5 - Competence https://lnkd.in/d_Z6d-jq #6 - Focus https://lnkd.in/dYvm9dHy #marketing #inhouseagency #advertising #CMOinsights #CMO

In-house agency reality #4 Channel control: “By controlling all channels in-house, we can finally coordinate our communication”. Most B2C companies communicate through more than 16 channels. This means that communication easily becomes fragmented. Producing material for all channels can also lead to duplication and inefficiency. Many therefore feel the need to coordinate their communications. The first step is to consolidate control of the channels, and the solution is often to bring the channel expertise in-house. The stage is finally set for true 360-degree communications. In theory. In practice, however, the organisation of the marketing department throws a spanner in the works. 🔴 Marketing departments are organised in silos (usually by channel type) and collaborate very poorly. Some try to patch things up with cross-functional teams, but this often creates massive inefficiencies, even though the team members are usually happy to have been involved. 🔴 They silos optimise their own channel and miss the much more important perspective of optimising the whole. In the worst cases, specialists defend their channel against others as if it were their own territory to expand. And no wonder - their egos and jobs are at risk if the channel is challenged. This makes it very difficult for the CMO to change the structure. 🔴 You focus and communicate on the channels that are closest to you and where you have internal expertise as they are easy to access and often require very little spending. We usually see that up 90% of the staff efforts are put on owned channels with VERY low impact. This means that despite low expenses, the actual cost is very high. And most continue to focus on these channels even if it turns out that you should be putting the effort elsewhere. The bottom line is that true 360-degree communication is hard to achieve, even if you are in the control room. The cause is your structure: your internal and agency organisation and your processes. But the potential in fixing it is huge. Here are some fundamental questions to help you enter that journey of improving your in-house agency situation: https://lnkd.in/dPiaHyND Also check out the other parts of this reality show: #1 - Cost savings https://lnkd.in/gbRmxVMJ #2 - Speed https://lnkd.in/dvEZa5UM #3 – Proximity https://lnkd.in/dBa5BcZR #5 - Competence https://lnkd.in/d_Z6d-jq #6 - Focus https://lnkd.in/dYvm9dHy #marketing #inhouseagency #advertising #CMOinsights #CMO

In-house agency reality show Episode 1 - Cost Savings: “In-house agencies are cheaper than downtown agencies.” But are they, though? The fact that downtown agencies charge a lot by the hour has been a needle in the eye for many CMOs. An obvious solution and the starting point for many in-house agencies is to hire your staff to save money. The upside is enormous as hourly rates for internal staff are much lower. Also, annoying extra charges for any small change to the assignment are long gone when nobody invoices for each spent hour. In theory, that is. When assessing marketing departments, we see they don’t know if their in-house agency saves them money. This is simply because they do not measure the hours spent and benchmark the actual cost against the alternatives. 💸 When we analyse the situation, we find that, in most cases, the in-house solution is far from cheaper. This is because the internalised solution consumes far more work hours than the external one. There are many reasons why this happens, and few are usually the in-house agency’s fault: 🔴 You don’t see how many hours are spent. And you don’t set a budget for them. 🔴 You produce a lot of stuff that would never be made if there were a cost associated with it. 🔴 Far too many people internally are involved in the process. 🔴 You allow too many changes as they are for free. 🔴  Internal briefs are sloppy, if they exist at all, thus generating many hours of calibration and changes 🔴 The processes are inefficient or are skipped. 👉 If you want to make your agency set-up more efficient, you need to find out the actual cost of your in-house agency. Then, you can evaluate options. From that, you can design your future agency set-up, weather it is internal, external or a hybrid. The right balance it what you need to aim for. Here are some fundamental questions to help you enter that journey: https://lnkd.in/dPiaHyND Also, check out the other episodes of the reality show: #2 - Speed https://lnkd.in/dvEZa5UM #3 - Proximity https://lnkd.in/dBa5BcZR #4 - Control https://lnkd.in/dEBJxhFK #5 - Competence https://lnkd.in/d_Z6d-jq #6 - Focus https://lnkd.in/dYvm9dHy #marketing #inhouseagency #advertising #CMOinsights #CMO

In-house vs. external agencies ❓ Does an in-house team do a better job than an external agency? If you ask the in-house team, the answer is yes. If you ask the external agency, however, the answer is no. This statement summarizes a new survey by Kapero, which also served as the foundation for last Friday's Good Morning People event. What do you think? Is there an important synergy between the two, or is one option preferable? Thank you to our panelists — Thomas Biesterfeldt, Susanne Zabrodsky, Robert af Klintberg Ryberg, and Per A. — for your insightful reflections, and to everyone of you who came to listen, ask questions, and help shape yet another interesting PPP seminar.

We are happy to have been invited to share our knowledge and experiences in the second largest country on the globe. Thank you Marc Binkley of the Calgary Marketing Association for letting Kapero be a part of Strategy Week.