Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Erik Modig
ll
Printed by:
In eko AB, Stockholm 2012
Krywords:
Advertising, creativity, advertising effectiveness, consumer marketing,
marketing communications, brand management
To
Science and creativity
Foreword
SSE is grateful for the financial support provieled by the Torsten and
Ragnar Söderberg Foundations which has made it possible to fulfill the
project.
Besides financial support the journey towarcls this thesis would not have
been possiblc without the gcncrous intcllcctual and cmotional support by
colleagues, friendsand family.
I vvould also like to thank the person that has been my wingman during
these four years. Jonas Colliander, I am very grateful for all the shared
laughs, discussions and struggles, not to mention the late nights in hotel
rooms all over Europe. I am very grateful for being able to count on you,
both as a trusted colleague and a close friencl.
Another person that has played a vital role in the making of this journey
is my boss and rolc modd, rescareher J\!Iagnus Södcrlund. The way you
pursue your search for new knowledge has brought me a lot of
inspiration and I hope that I one day can lcave a similar footprint in the
academic world as you have. You have always cared that I have had the
mental peace to focus on my own research and develop my own vvay of
thinking. Thank you for that.
I would also like to thank all my other present and past collcagucs at
Center for Consumer JVIarketing: Claes-RobertJulander, Fredrik Lange,
Fredrik Törn, Hanna Berg, Henrik Sjödin, Jens Nordfålt, Joel Ringbo,
John Karsberg, Karina Töndevold, lVfikael Hernant, Nielas Öhman,
Nina Åkes tam, Per-J onas Eliaeson, Peter Gabriclson, Rebecea
Gruvhammar och Susanna Erlandsson. You have all contributed to a
stimulating and joyful working environmcnt.
During the years I have had the privilcge to study for brilliant schalars in
courses and research seminars. Anders \Vestlund, Björn Alm, Corinne
Krusc, Henrik Uggla,James Burroughs,Johan Roos, Lars En~vall, Lars
Strannegård, Page J\iloreau and Tiffany \Vhite, I would like to thank you
for the knowlcdge and feedback that you so gcnerously have been given
me. I would also like to thank all respondents to the numerous
questionnaires that led up to this research. Spccifically, I want to thank
Henrik Callerstrand, who contributed with data while working on his
master thesis. I vvould also like to thank J\!Iarie Tsujita for helping me
w·ith all the practical details that come \vith every little steps towards a
PhD title.
lX
ErikAfodig
Chapter l
Especially, this thesis aims to answer a reoccurring plea within the field
of advertising research for more contributions about advertising
creativity (\Vhite, 1972; Zinkhan, 1993; Sasser and Koslow, 2008). One
specific gap in advertising creativity research to date is that studies have
prcdominatcly focuscd on issucs rcgarding the productian of advcrtising
creativity (Sasser and Koslow, 2008). Current research need to better
understand the response to crcativc advcrtiscmcnts by documcnting how
advertising professionals and consumer assess and value creativity
(Bcrnardin and Kcmp-Robcrtson, 2008; Sasser and Koslow, 2008). This
seems especially important as empirical studies to date reveal that
advertising professionals seems to have no formalized understanding
about hmv advcrtising crcativity work (El-Murad and \1\!cst, 2004;
Nyilasy and Reid, 2009a). In addition, research has predominately used
an information proccssing perceptive in cxplaining the positive cffccts of
creativity advertising (Sasser and Koslow, 2008). To fully understand the
cffccts advcrtising crcativit:y has on consumcrs, currcnt research should
initiate in new perspectives and new theories about how advertising
crcativity might work is nccdcd (Sasscr and Koslow, 2008). In the next
sections I will specify in more detail the purpose of the thesis and its
acadcmic and practical rclcvancc.
consumers have become more advertising savvy and are able and
inclined to assess the value of single advertisement (Dahlen and Edenius,
2007; Dahlen, Granlund, and Grenros, 2009). You could argue that
consumers have in one sense become advertising mediums themselves, as
the use of their "own" brands on blogs, Twitter, or Facebook has
incrcascd cxponcntially (Nielsen, 2011, 20 12). Thcir prcscncc in social
media and in charmels such as YouTube has given consumers a behind-
thc-sccncs look into advcrtising and how it work. This might affcct how
they judge and value advertising creativity. By including the consumer
pcrspcctivc this thesis aims to adel new insights about how advcrtising
creativity might work.
Third, this thesis present onc of fcw studies that comparcs advcrtising
professionals and consumers assessment of advertising creativity and
rclatcd conccpts such as divcrgcncc, rclcvancc, craftsmanship, humor
and advertising effectiveness. Thereby contributing to the current
research strcam about hmv audicnccs respond and cvaluatc advcrtising
creativity (Smith et al., 2007; Yang and Smith, 2009). Especially the
findings cxpand the literature that has stuelied the diffcrcnccs bctwccn
consumer and advertising professionals assessment (\Vhite and Smith,
2001; Koslow, Sasscr, and Riordan, 2003; \l\7cst, Kovcr, and Caruana,
2008). The findings show that advertising research might need to re-
asscss which factors that cxplain consumers and advcrtising profcssionals'
judgments of advertising creativity. In addition, findings suggest that
research nccd to furthcr elevdop the understanding on hmv advcrtising
professionals differ in their view of advertising creativity relative to
advcrtising cffcctivcncss.
purchase intention (see Smith, Chen, and Yang, 2008; and Sasser and
Koslow, 2008 for review of previous studies). This thesis complements
and contributes to this stream of research in three ways. First it expands
the literature about signaling effects of adverting creativity (Dahlen,
Rosengren, and Törn, 2008). Findings shovv that award winning creative
advcrtiscmcnt signals morc pcrccivcd sender cffort and cxpcnsc,
campared to non-a\vard winning advertisements, which in turn has a
positive cffcct on brand cvaluation. This finding contributcs by
strengthen the notion that the positive efl'ect on brand evaluation might
not only be cxplaincd by incrcascd proccssing but could also be
explained by signal theory. Second, this thesis employ what can be called
an out-of-the-box thinking when it comes to potential effects advertising
crcativity might have. By showing that advcrtising crcativity can cnhancc
the perceived and real creativity of the audience (the reader of the
crcativc advcrtiscmcnt) it contributcs to cxisting thcorics on how
advertising creativity work. Finally, the last study highlights how
advcrtising crcativity rclatcs to other areas of research (in this casc the
artistic style of images in advertising design) in an attempt to find
similaritics and apportunitics for thcorctical syncrgics as wcll as new
ways of thinking about advertising creativity.
Both industry reports and academic artides clearly tell that creativity is
beneficial for the success of advertisements (e.g, Gunn et al., 2010;
Smith, C hen, and Y ang, 2008) Findings indicates that advertising
creativity has a positive effect on purchase intentions (Smith et al., 2007;
Smith, C hen, and Y ang, 2008) and has a direct impact on the financial
pcrformancc of firms (Im and \1\1orkman, 2004). Research also shows
that advertising creativity has a positive impact on brand attitude and
interest (Smith, Chcn, and Yang, 2008; Dahlcn, Rosengren, and Törn,
CHAPTER l 7
2008), which indirectly affects firm performance (e.g. Aaker 1996; Keller
1998). Consequently, these arguments should be sufficient to
demonstrate the practical relevance of adverting creativity, and thus this
thesis. At the same time, however, advertisers find it clifficult to manage
creativity within the aclvertising planning process (Kover, Goldberg, and
Jamcs, 1995; Hacklcy, 2003). In that sense, this thesis can be scen as onc
step in an attempt to increase the understanding and use of advertising
crcativity and thcrcby potcntially milder thosc difficultics. I ,,vill present
this practical relevance by highlighting four different areas in which this
thesis contributcs to advcrtising practicc.
Chapter 2
UNDERSTANDING ADVERTISING
CREAliVITY
Definition of Creativity
The academic interest in creativity began vvith J. P. Guilford's 1950
address to the American Psychology Association where he initiated the
call to define, measure and improve creative ability (Guilford, 1950).
Since then there has been significant efforts in defining ,,vhat creativity is
and hO\v it should be measured (Nieusburger, 2009). In the Nevv Oxford
American Dictionary (20 l O, online access August 20 12) creativity is
defined as "The use of the imagination or original ideas", thus,
highlighting the importance of doing something original (i.e., something
that is not dependent on other people's ideas, and is inventive and
unusual) in order to be creative. This definition is dominant in traditional
tests of creativity, such as the "unusual uses" test, which mainly focus on
the ability to engage in divergent thinking (l\'Ieusburger, 2009).
they are novel or original and (2) they are potentially relevant for, or
useful to an organization". This definition, vvith small differences in the
vvords used, has become dominant throughout academia and in
textbooks on creativity (Nleusburger, 2009). It refers to an original iclea
as something divergent (tending to differ from the norm or develop in a
different direetion), and highlights that creativity combines both
divergenee and relevanee (closely conneeted with or appropriate to the
matter at hand). However, what is defined as divergent and relevant may
be in reference to the creator, society, or the domain within which the
CITation occurs (Meusburger, 2009), meaning that what is defined as
creative or not is in relation to a specific field, person or culture.
One of the goals with this thesis is to contribute to the definition and
understanding of creativity within the field of advertising research. In
terms of an initial viewpoint, this research rclies on the opinion each
individual holels about what is-or is not-creative, regardless of
previous definitions or ,,vhich reasoning each single individual use to
arrive at their final opinion. As such, the thesis follows the psychological
research that rclies on "laymen theory" in defining a concept (Elsbach
and Kramer, 2003; Puccio and Chimento, 2001). In other words, if a
person says something is creative, then it is creative for that person.
I have ehosen this approach for three reasons. First, as divergence and
relevance may both relate to the creator and to the field in which they
create, it is impossiblc for more than one person to share the same
unclerlying definition of creativity. In other words, each indiviclual has
his or her own perceptions about what is divergent or relevant, which
me ans that clefining creativity on the basis of these concepts can, at best,
give us a good estimate. Second, research has shown that respondents
use other factors besides divergence and relevance in their definitions of
advertising creativity (e.g., \Vest, Kover, and Caruana, 2008). Only by
not limiting my vie\v to these two elements can I find ne\v perspectives.
Third, one of the main goals of this thesis is to document hO\v different
audiences perceive advertising creativity and how their perceptions
CHAPTER 2 13
FraLer 19f3J C reolive Slral~·lY A. l-/ra nogemun l Perspeeli ve journal of Advcrli sirrg
Micheli 1984 Accord ond Discord in Agency-Ciient Perceptio ns of (Aeoti vity joumo l of Advertisiug Reseorch
l\l'.ichell l 98-1 .l l.gency Client l rends: l'olmi7otion versus rrogmentation lournal of ,\dvertisinq Resemch
Vonden [bgh, Smilh, 19f36 Inbnol Agency Rdolionships: Accounl Services and Crcolivc Journal of Advcrli sirrg
ond \Nicks Personnel
Hirschrnon 19f39 Rofc,[iosod 1</,odels ol Ad verlising C roolion o nd Produdiorr Journa l of Advcrli sirrg
P.enedetto, l omote, l 99? l)evelopinq C reotive /\dverti sinq Stro tegy for the .laponese lournal of ,\dvertising Reseorch
ond C hanelron iiAarketrJoce
West 1993 Cro~sNo tionu l Creutive Personulitie.s. Proce.sses , ond Age11cy Journol of Advertising Reseorch
Philosophies
Helgesen 199-1 .A.dvertlslng .A.\·vords and .A.dvertisinq /\qency l)etformance Cntena Journal of ;\dvertisinq Reseorch
Kover ond Goldberg 1995 The Ca mes C opvwrilers Play': Conllic l, OLY~si~~on lrol, A N ow Journal ol Advcrli sing Research
Appi<xJch
l\l·.urphy ond 199ö Usrnq Judqment l'rofiles to Compore /\dvertisinq /\qencies ond lournal of ,\dvertisinq Resemch
1\Aoynord Clients Campcfrqn Volues
Toylor, lloy , o nd 1996 llow lrench i\dvertising Professio nols Develop Creotive Strote<j)' joumo l of Advertisiug
llo ley
West ond P.erthod 199/ llntecedents of kisk lakinq ~ehovior by /\dvertisers f- mprrrcol lournal of ,\dvertisinq Reseorch
Evidcncc and /V~anagcmcnl lmplic:olions
Reid, Whitehill King, 1998 TOfrlevel Agency C rentives kx1k ot P.,dver ti sing C reotivity' Then Journol of Advertising
ond Delorme ond No'N
\Vest ond lord 2001 Advertising AgenCy' Philosc>fllies ond [mployee Risk Tnk"ing Journol of Advertising
Hill ond .Johnson / 00-1 Understond1n>J creo tive ser,ice: o Oualrtotive Study of the lnternotionollournol of /\dvertising
ll.dvertising l'roblem l)efineotion, Communicatron ond kesponse
IAPDCR) Pru~ess
lrrr o"'J \Norkm cm 2004 I-A11ket Orientofron, Cre<Jtivir; , o nd New Pr<xh:t Perforrnonce in joumo l of .·';\orketing
High l echnology hrms
Sulherlond , Duke, 2004 A lv\uJd ol lv\orkeling lnform a lion Flow journal ol A.dvorli sing
ond Abornelhy
Horsky 700ö l he Chonqinq /\rchr tecture d .A.dverti sinq /\gencies lv\.orketrnq Science
Koslow , Sasser, ond 2006 Do /Y\orkbs gol lhc A.dvorli sing Thoy N eod or lhc Advorli sing journal ol A.dvorli sing
Riordarr Thcv Descwc?
Sosser, Koslow, ond / 00/ Creotive and lnteroctive Medro Use by /1qencres: f-nqaq~n>J an lournal of ,\dvertisinq Reseorch
Riordarr I:V\C 1-/·.cdio Pololle for lmpbmenling Advcrlising Ca mpo igns
Verbeke et of. 7008 hndinq l he Keysto Creotivity in lid /\qencies lournal of ,\dvertisinq
V\/ofler 2010 Does Doing Cood Do Ccx)d~ How Pro Gono \;\'ork ,V,oy Gondil journal ol A.dvorli sing Re worch
CHAPTER 2 l7
;\dvertisinq /\gencies
Sluhlfa ul 2011 The Craaliva CcYJC - An orgonisalionol influanca on the creoliva lnlornotio nol .Journ al of Advcrli sing
p!Cx:ess in mlverti si ng
O liver ond .A.shley ?O l ? Cre:Jtrve le.'Jders' Vievls on i\Aonoglng i\dvertisinq Creothi ily Journol of IV"rketrng l heorr ond
llroctic:e
Productian oriented. Person focus
.AlY2r 1976 C real ive Advcrlising Sludcnls: Hu,v Dillcrccnl2 Journal ol Adverlising
Re id l 'l// /\re /\dvertisinq f-d ucotors Gc,~,d Judqes of Creotive l olenn Journol of .A.dverti sing
\/oughn 1982 Poi11t ot viH·~v : Creotive.s vHrsus Re.seorc:he1.s ..'v\ust They Be Jo r11nul of Adverti sinu Resemch
Advcrsarics
,<\!v_-:.( 7onn 1'186 ~d r tori ol: ,\dvertisinq f-ducotion Journol of .A.dvertrsrng
t\nd rews o nd Smith 1996 In Semch of the t'v\wketing lrrroginotion: l octors A tlecting the Jorrrnul of I.J~Hketi nu Re semdr
Craalivily ol Markding Prc~~rorns for 1•/:alurc Pre-duels
hvinq ond .Jones :JCXX) ,\gency Heliefs in the l'ower d /\dvertising Internatronat .Journal of ,\ dvertising
Young 2C{~{) C reotive D'rfterences bet.veen Copy-vrilers ond A rt Diredors Jorrrnul of Adverti sinu Resemch
H l\l·.urod ond West :JCX)J Risk and Creati\.'lt>' In /\dverllsing Journol of lv\.orketinq .l ·.·'.onagement
l lo cklev 2C\)3 l low Divergent Beliels Cause Account Teom Contlict lllte!lroti orrol Journol of Advertisi11g
Koslow, Sossar, ond 2CYJ3 v'\ihol Is Crcolivo lo v\ihorn and W h y? Perceptions in Advccrlising Journal ol Adverlising Research
Riordon Ag cncios
Devinney, l)owling. :JCXb C:lient ond .A.qency lvl.ental i'A~,del s in hmilh'Jting /\ dvertisinq Internatronat .Journal of ,\ dvertising
ond Colli ns
llocktey 2(\)7 The Trouble w ith Creofrves Negotioting Creo tive ldentit1 in lllte!lrotiorrol Jorrrnol of Advertisirrg
Advcrlising .A gcncios
Nyilosy ond Rerd :JCXtlo ,\gency l'ractitrcmers lheories of How ,\dvertisinq VVorks Journol of .A.dvertrsrng
Nyilosy mrd Reid 2C\J9b i'{Jellcy Proctitiorrers' Meto-Theories of /\dvertisi rrg l11tellroti orrol Journo l of Advertisi11g
/1shley ond O liver :l() l () (:reative l eader5 Journol of .A.dverti sing
Chong ?<XX> Hovv do /\dverllsing Cre.'Jtive l )rrectors l)erc:eive Research? Internationol Journol of /\dverlising
Toub io 2CIJ6 ldeo Generotion, C reofrvily, o nd lrrcentives ,v.mketing Science
Kernord rn and Kemp ?<X)8 cnvisioning the future of /1dverlising Creati vi~; Research: W ildfire Journal of /\dvertisinq
ko bertson ?(X)8: C reotivilv w rth o Human louch
Djobovo 2CIJ8 VYhy Do Advertisers llse Pr111s2 A lingulstic Perspecfrve Journo l of Advertisin(J Reseorch
crevelles et d. ?<X)8 cnvisionrnq the future of /\dverlising Creoti vi~; keseorch: l he Journo l of ,\dvertisinq
C onc:ept of · lmaginative lntensity in /\dv'er-ti sing
GoldenlJer(J o nd 2CIJ8 VYhen Deep Structures Surloce Journo l of Advertising
MeJLurskv
(7riffin ?<X)8 from l'erformonce lo ' ·-'nslery Journol of ,\dvertisinq
l leiser, Sierro, orrd 2CIJ8 Creotivity vio Cort<Xllr s i~Jkespeople in Print h.ls Journo l of Advertising
Torres
~osslter. John R ?<X)8 cnvisionrng the future of /\dverlising Creotivrt)' Reseorch: l)efininq Journol of ,\dvertisinq
the Necessory Components of C reolive, Hfective ,\ds
Smser 2CIJ8 C reoting Pmsion to [nuoue Versus [nroge Consurner Co-cre<Jtors Journo l o f Consurner Mmketin(J
wilh Agency Co,~onspi rolors Unlooshing Crealivily
Slcworl, O ren, and 2C0B Envisioning lho Fulurc of .A dverlising C reolivify Research: C reo live journal of A.dvorli sing
VVan ond cffecli ve /\cJverlising: flo la ner ng Spontonert)' ond l)iscrpl ine
Boruhini et ol 2010 Syrnbiolic Posterres ol Corrrrrrerciol Advertisirru cmd Street Ar t Journo l of Advertisin(J
Jaya nli 2010 A N olnographic Explorolie n: Listening lo Online C onsumer journa l of A.dvorli sing Research
Convcrsa tio ns
Campbell ?O l l Commentory: cvrde nce l'roves the future Is Now Journol of ,\dvertisinq kesemch
.Resp._"Jnse orienred..Place facus
l)ohlen ?<X)~, l he r\Aedium os o Conlextuol Cue Journol of ,\dvertisinq
Dolil<m. lriberu . o nd 2CIJ9 Long live Creotive .V·.edio Choice Journo l of Advertisin(J
Nilsson
Response oriented, Person focus
Kover. j ornes, o nd 1997 To VYhorn Do ,t._dvertising C re<Jtives VYr ite2 /',n lnferenlio l h>S\-ver Journo l of Advertising Re se<llch
Sonner
V\ihile a nd Srnilh 200 1 Asse>ssing .Advorlising Creo livily Using lhc C reo livo Produd journal d .Adverlising Roseardr
Sernontic Scole
\.Yest, Kover. o nd 2fJ()B Proc:titionP-r ond Customer \ /iews ot AdvP-rtising Creotivity jour11o l of Advertisirrg
Caruona
Response oriented, Process focus
Stew ml mrd Koslow 1989 [xe<:utio nCJI l o ctors cmd Adverfrsinu [flectivelless: ,t._ Replim tio n Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
Hoberlond ond Docin 1992 Tho Dovdopmen l or a lv\cosure lo Assess Viowcrs .ILY.:ignK>nls or A.dva nccs in Consumer Research
the C reotrvrt)' of on ,\dvertisement: ,\ l'relimrnmy Study
Kover . GoldiHf.J. 1995 CreCJ tivity vs [ftectivelless2 jourrrd of Adverlisi11g Rese<mlr
m rdjcmres
A ng and Low 2()()0 Exploring the Dimensions or Ad Crool ivily Psychek.'gv & 1'/,orkeli ng
Sto11e. Besser. m rd 20C'IJ Re<:oll, Likinu. cmd Creotivit)' i11 N Co mrnerciols: /',New Jour11o l of Advertisirrg Reseordr
Lewis Apprcx1ch
Pielcrs, V\iorlop, ond 2C02 Breoking Through lho C luller: Bond ils or Advc rlising O rig ina lii'! lV'1onagcmcnl Science
W ed el ond fomiliollt)' for flrond il.ttentron ond l •.•oemory
Smith ond Yorrg 2CIJ4 Tovmrd o (-;errero l Theory of Creotivi ty i11 Advertisinu [xomirrirrg ,v.mketinu Theory
the Role o f Diveruerrce
Tollisdol. 2C05 :V\odoling lhc lv\iuodlccls ol Tolevisle n Advcrlising : VVhich Ad Markding Science
Works . When. Where for H ow Iong. and Why~l
Till cmd Bcmc:k 2CIJS Re<:oll cmd Persuosio11 Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
A ng , Lee, o nd kong 2C07 Tho Ad Crcalivify Cub<:>: CmrccplualiLolio n and lniliol Validalion journal d lho Acodernv of
lv\.orketrnq Science .
Smith et ol. ?<X)/ I\Aodeling lhe Delerminanls and Hfects of Creativrt)' in /\dverlising lv\.orketrnq Science
Boock, W ilso n, ond 2C0B Creolivilv ond /1/',f)mory Ericels j ournal of Advcrli sing
lrll
l)ohlen , Rosenqren, ?<X)8 .Advertising Creotivily /v'1o~ers Journo l of ,\dvertisinq kesemch
mrd Tör Il
Pools a nd Dcwille 2C0B Coiling a lino on Prirrl .Ads journal or A.dvorli sing
Srnilh, U ren, o nd 2C0B Tho lmpacl d .Adverlising Creolivil'! on lhe Hicrorchy or Erkx:!s journal or A.dvorli sing
Ycmq
lleotlr. Noirn 0 11d 2CIJ9 l low C!teclive is Creotivi~l2 jour11o l of Advertisirrg Reseordr
Bo~orrrl ey
Yang ond Smilh 2()09 Be'!ond Allenlien Elfocls: 1'/,odoling lho Porsuosive and Emo lionol Markding Science
cffects of .A.dvertising Creo li vi~;
Kirn . l lem. o nd Ycxm 20 10 Adver ti sinu C reCJtivi ty in Koreo Jour11o l of Advertisirrg
CHAPTER 2 19
Shemr n. Vorki. ond 70 1 l lhe Differentroi f-ff~t of ,\d Novelty· ond .l·.·' essoge Usefulness on lournd of .A.dvertrsrng
A.shiHy Brcmd judgrnents
Tha·xetica! Reviews
Sa sser ond Kos lov; /(X)8 l )esperotely Seekinq ,\dvertrsmg Creofrvity lournd of .A.dverti sinq
To sum up, agencies neecl to handie the tension, both with the clients
and within the agency, which ariscs from different approachcs to
advertising creativity. One suggested way is to negotiate a common
crcativc code in order to minimizc tension and optimizc crcativc
performance.
l\'Iurad and \Vest, 2004; Smith and Yang, 2004). I \vill now discuss w-hat
we today know about different factors of advertising creativity.
Even though researchers have used different labels, all published studies
have measured the factor of divergence in some way (see Table 3). This
factor of creativity reflects a deviation from the norm-a stimulus that
previous information does not lead one to expect (Haberland and Dacin,
1992). Divergence earresponds to unexpectedness in the sense that
advertisements inconsistent w-ith other advertisements in the same
product category (see Smith and Yang, 2004).
Study n·
ulvergence Pefevonce Croftsmanship O ther Foctors
West, Kover, ond C oruono, 2008 Orig inality Relevonce, gool Execution Der1sive, humor
dlrected
Novelty Usefulness
Shein1n , Vark1 , o nd Ashley, 20 11
* There are oddit1onal outhorsthat have stud 1ed factors o f odvertis1ng creat1vity (Sm1th and Yang , 2004)
However, these studies are presenled in textbooks o r in ocodemic iournals and conference proceedings which
l consid er outside the sco pe of thrs thesis. N one of these post-dotes 200 1 which also makes them o f less
relevonce For our current understanding of the assessment of advert ising creot1vity. Therefore l have excluded
these contributions in this thesis. Pleose see Smith ond Yong , 2004 for review of these contr1butions
CHAPTER 2 29
T o sum up, during the last years we have witnessed numerous studies
that document the positive eflects of advertising creativity. Creativity is
32 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
Kover, Goldberg, ond James, Emotional connection , information Ad attitude, Purchose intentions
1995 processing
Till and Baack, 2005 Information processing. altentian Recall, A d and brand oltitude
Smith et of., 200 7 Informa tion processing: attention, Ad ond brand attitude, Purchose
motivation, depth of pro cessing intentions
Dohlen , Rosengren . ond Törn , Signal theory: sender effort Perceived brand quality, brand
2008 interest
Smith, Chen ond Yong , 2008 Informatio n processrng . altentian Attentio n, lnterest, Depth of
processing, Ad ond brand
attrtude a nd purchose intentrons
Boock, W ilson, and Till 2008 Information process ing : altentia n Recall , Recognrtion
Ya ng ond Smith, 2009 Information processing : offect, desire Viewrng rntentrons , purchose
to postpone ciasure intentions
Sheinrn , Vorkr, a nd Ash ley, 20 11 Information processrng· affect Recall , ad a nd brand a ttr tude,
brand trust
CHAPTER 2 33
Although creativity has been the focus of the aclvertising inclustry for
many years, more extensive research on the connection between
advertising creativity and measures of advertising effectiveness has only
emerged in the last decade (i.e., Ang and Low, 2000; Stone, Besser, and
Lewis, 2000; Pieters, vVarlop, and 'Vedel, 2002; Till and Back, 2005;
Ang, Lee, and Leong, 2007; Smith, Chen, and Yang, 2008). The focus
has been on a information processing theory, which links advertising
creativity ,,vith eommunieation effeetiveness and different hierarchy-of-
effects measures (e.g., Smith, Chen, and Yang, 2008). However, Dahlen,
CHAPTER 2 35
Rosengren, and T örn (2008) used signal theory to show that creative
advertisements signaled g-re ater sender effort to the consumer. By
partaking in this perspective, by asking the question could creat1v1ty
signal additional information to the audience?, nevv insight might be
found and developed.
the effects on the advertised brand for advertisements that have won
either a creativity award or an effectiveness awarcl. The findings show
that creative advertisements is perceived by consumers to signal more
seneler effort and expense when compared with "average" and
"effective" advertisements, which in turn positively affect brand attitude,
interest and word-of-mouth intentions. The fourth artide takes an
"outside-the-box" perspeetive on the positive effects of creative
advertiscmcnts. It shows that crcative ads not only bencfit the advertiscd
brand but also the media vehicle and those who are exposed to the
advertiscmcnt. This introduecs a new pcrspective on the cffeets of
creative advertising by measuring effects on other stakeholders. The fifth
artide links creativity to the emerging literature on the effects of artwork
indudcd in marketing tools. By investigating the rolc of art in
advertising, the artide shovvs that by enhancing perceptions of creativity,
the indusion of art can lcad to positive effects on the advertised brand.
Methodology
The first step in this research process vvas to document the researeher
perspective on advertising creativity. Thus, a theoretieal analysis was first
conducted leading to the list of l 07 academic artides that I have
described earlier. F or the empirical studies some specific requirements
was set in order to be able to investigate the research questions. As this
thesis sets out to test how different audiences perceive advertising
creativity, samples from different populations were necessary. J'vfost
important was the inclusion of a large consumer and advertising
professional sample to enable investigations and comparison of hmv
these two audiences view advertising creativity. These t\vo requirements
we re the foundation of stu dy l and 2, w hich explore how consumers and
advertising professionals think about advertising creativity. Study 3 to 5
are experimental studies used to investigate potential side effects that
creativity might have on consumers and media vehicles. Study 6
CHAPTER 3 39
Table 5. Studies
The artide extends the findings and the vocabulary found in the large
body of research on advertising professionals' assessments of advertising
crcativit:y (e.g. , VVhitc and Smith, 200 l; Koslow, Sasscr, and Riordan,
2003; 'Vest, Kover, and Caruana, 2008) to include advertising
profcssionals' assessments of advcrtising cffcctivcncss. 'Vith fcw
exeeptions (Kover, 1995; Nyilasy and Read, 2009a, 2009b), assessments
of advcrtising cffcctivcness have been neglcctcd in previous research.
Therefore, this paper furthers the understanding of advertising
cffcctivcncss and the ways in which advcrtising works by dctailing the
experienee and taeit knowledge that advertising professionals share.
The artide also uses data from study three on advertising professionals
and comparcs the ratings on advcrtising crcativity and cffcctivcncss with
those of the faetors divergenee, relevanee, eraftsmanship and humor for
20 real advcrtiscmcnts.
The findings show that what advcrtising professionals are looking for
affects their perceptions of advertisements. Advertising professionals rate
advcrtiscmcnts diffcrcntly on the four sub-dimensions divcrgcnec,
relevanee, eraftsmanship and humor depending on whether they are
asked to assess advertising ereativity or advertising effeetiveness. The
results indieate that the trend in the advertising literature to merge the
two coneepts might be misleading. Advertising literature should rather
treat ereativity and effectiveness as separate eonstructs. Although
44 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
The hypotheses are tested on the data from study one. Hovvever, it
focuscs on thrcc different typcs of the sampied advcrtiscmcnts: crcativity-
award-winning, eftectiveness-award-winning and non-award-,vinning
advertisements. The results show that highly ereative advertising might
have positive effects on brand attitude, brand interest, and brand word-
of-mouth, while efficient advertising might have corresponding negative
effccts. '1\Tc find that advertisements with higher-than-avcragc pcrecived
expense and effort have a positive effect on consumer evaluations and
that advertisements with lmvcr-than-average perceived expensc have a
negative effect. This research contributes to the signal theory perspective
on advcrtising crcativity and shows that crcativity signal both higher
perceived sender effort and expense.
In this regard, advertisers should be aware of the signals that they send to
consumers and carefully consicler the fact that hozD advertising
communicates can have both positive and negative effects on consumer
perceptions of a brand. This suggests that the traditional division
bct:wecn "creativc" and "cffectivc" advcrtising should be reasscsscd, and
that consumer perceptions of expense and effort coulcl adel important
input for advertising effcctiveness measurcmcnts.
CHAPTER 3 45
The questions are tested in three experimental studies. The first study
exposed consumers to more versus less creative ads and showed that the
consumers vvho \vere exposed to the creative advertisement performed
better in a standard test of creative ability. The reasoning builds on, and
contributes to, two bodies of research. First, it shows that the exposure of
a morc crcativc advcrtising le ad to incrcascd consumer proccssing of the
advertisement (e.g., Baack, vVilson, and Till, 2008; Smith, Chen, and
Y ang, 2008) and that a heightened level of processing can impact
favorably on consumer crcativity (c.g., Burrought and l\!Iick, 2004; Dahl
and l\!Ioreau, 2002, 2007). Second, the study show that the exposure to
crcativc advcrtising also hcightcncd the pcrccivcd lcvcl of own crcativity
46 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
Thcsc thrcc studies find that crcativcly "thinking outside the box" in
advertising can give us additional insight on how aclvertising creativity
might be valuablc for other stakeholders than the advcrtiscr. The
findings adel to existing knowledge by showing that advertising creativity
may impact consumers in ways that are beneficial not only to senelers but
to consumers as wcll. Advcrtiscrs could usc this finding as an inspiration
to explore new potential positive effects on consumers.
DISCUSSION
This thesis adels to the growing number of artides that show that
consumers are ablc and inclincd to assess the overall lcvcl of crcativity
within an advertisement (Dahlen, Rosengren, and Törn, 2008). In so
doing it ansv,rcrs to calls for morc studies on consumer response to
advertising (Bernardin and Kemp-Robertson, 2008; Sasser and Koslow,
2008). This thesis shows that consumers are indeed able to assess the
crcativity of an advcrtiscmcnt and that thcy rate cffcctivcncss highcr for
aclvertisements they juclge as creative. This finding adel to previous
research that shows that advcrtising profcssionals' and students'
assessments of creativity influence perceived aclvertising effectiveness
(c.g., Smith, Chcn and Yang, 2008; Dahlcn Rosengren, and Törn,
2008). However, this research show that even though consumers value
crcativity in the same sense as advcrtising professionals thcy nccd not
judge the level of creativity equally. This suggest that consumer opinion
are important whcn cvaluating advcrtising crcativity.
Onc aim with this thesis was to contributc to the knowlcdgc about how
vve can and should measure advertising creativity. By quantifying the
diffcrcnccs in advcrtising profcssionals' and consumcrs' asscssmcnts, this
thesis contributes to this research stream about how audiences define and
assess advcrtising crcativity (c.g. Smith and Y ang, 2004; Smith et al.,
2007; Kim, Han, and Y oon, 20 l 0). The findings suggest a broader
pcrspcctivc on crcativity is nccdcd in the field, given to the currcntly
predominating focus on 'divergence' and 'relevance' as the sole factors
important for crcativity. Spccifically, my studies show that whcn it comcs
to dcfining advcrtising crcativity, taking into account the consumer
perspective adel value to current research. This validates previous
findings that show that consumers usc additional factors in thcir
definitions of creativity, compared to professional advertisers ('Vest,
Kovcr, and Caruana, 2008; Kim, Han, and Yoon, 2010). As thcrc sccms
to be a lack of consensus within the advertising industry on how
consumers assess advcrtising crcativity, the findings in my thesis may
help to serve as a bridge between the differences between 'the
profcssionals' definition' and 'the consumcrs' definition' of advcrtising
creativity (Kover, Goldberg, and James, 1995; El-Niurad and \Vest,
2004; Nyilasy and Rcid, 2009a). My findings shmv that, in comparison to
advertising professionals, consumers view divergence as less important,
whilc 'rclcvancc', 'humor', and 'wcll-craftincss' as rclativcly morc
important dimensions of creativity. This implies that different groups
dcfinc advcrtising crcativity by adopting a "what's in it for mc"
perspective that reflects their own position. As a result, a definition of
advcrtising crcativity must takc the spccific rolc of the audicncc and its
goals into account.
Limitations
In this thesis I have airned at making a contribution to the academic
literature on advertising creativity. The thesis is not a comprehensive
guide about how to successful plan creativc advertising, but one attempt
to help researchers and professionals in approving advertising theories
and practice. Given this aim and scope I have had to make certain
choices regarding methods and perspectives. These choices come with
limitations and implications on my results and contribution. Each artide
has its own specific limitations, which is stated in each article. In the
following section I will highlight certain overall limitations with the
research metlwds employed.
One limitation is that these studies are carriecl out in a western European
country and therefore dcpendent on specific cultural aspects from this
part of the world. l t might not be the case that creativity is assessed in a
similar way in other parts of the world. Further, the implcmentation and
58 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
Aaker, David (1996), Building Strong Brands. New York: The Free
Press.
Ailawadi, Kusum L., Neslin, Seott A., and Lehmann, Donald R. (2003),
"Reven u e Premium as an Outcome l\!Ieasure of Brand Equity",
Journal ofl\!larketing, 67 (October), 1-17.
Amabile, Theresa (1982) " The Social Psychology of Creativity: A
Consensual Assessment Technique", Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 43 (5), 997-1013.
Amabile, Theresa (1983), The Social Psychology of Creativity, New
York: Springer-Veclay.
Amabile, Theresa (1996), Creativity in Context, Boulder, CO: \Vestview
Press.
Amabile, Theresa (1997), "l\,fotivating creativity in organizations: On
doing vvhat you love and loving what you do" , California
lVIanagement Review, 40, 39-58.
Andrews, Jonlee and Smith, Daniel C. (1996), "In Search of the
l\!Iarketing lmagination: Factors Affecting the Creativity of
l\!Iarketing Programs for l\!Iature Products" , Journal of l\'farketing
Research, 33 (lVfay), 174-187.
Andrus, Roman R. (1968), "Creativity: A Function for Computers or
Executives," Journal oflVfarketing, 32, (April), 1-7.
Ang, Swee H. and Lovv, Sharon Y. lVL (2000), "Exploring the
Dimensions of Ad Creativity" , Psychology & l\1arketing, l 7
(October), 835-854.
Ang, Swee H., Lee, Yih H., and Leong Siew 1\!I. (2007), "The ad
ereativity cube: coneeptualization and initial validation" , Journal of
the Academy ofl\!Iarketing Science, 35, 220-232.
Ashley, Christy and Oliver,Jason D. (2010), "Creative Leaders",Journal
of Advertising, 39 (1), 115-130.
60 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
Baack, Daniel \V., \Vilson, Rick T., and Till, Brian D. (2008), "Creativity
and l\!Iemory Effects: Recall, Recognition, and an Exploration of
N ontraditionall\!Iedia" , Journa1 of Advertising, 3 7 (\Vinter), 85-94.
Benedetto, C. Anthony, Tamate, l\'fariko, and Chandran, Rajan (1992),
"Deve1oping Creative Advertising Strategy for the Japanese
1\!Iarketplace", Journal of Advertising Research, (January/February),
39-48.
Besemer, Susan and O'Quin, Karen (1986), "Analyzing Creative
Products: Refinement and T est ofJ udging Instrument", The J ourna1
of Creative Behavior, 20:2, 115-26.
Besemer, Susan, and Treffinger, Donald J (1981 ), "Analysis of Creative
Products: Review and Synthesis,'' The Journal of Creative Behavior,
r·3 , 1-o
1:J. :>u- 70o.
Blasko, Vincent J and 1\!Iokwa, l\!Iichael P. (1986), "Creativity in
Advertising: A Janusian Perspective", Journal of Advertising, 15 (4),
43-72.
Blasko, Vincent]. and 1\!Iokwa, l\!Iichael P. (1988), "Paradox, Advertising
and the Creative Process", CmTent Issues & Research In Advertising.
Burke, Raymond R., Rangaswamy, Arvind, vVind,Jerry, and Eliashberg,
Jehoshua (1990), "A Knowledge-Based System for Advertising
Design", l\farketing Science, 9(3), 212-229.
Bursk, Edward C. and Seth, BaWt Singh (1976), "The In-house
Adverting Agency",Journal ofAdvertising, 24-27.
Burroughs, James E. , and David G. l\!Iick (2004), "Exploring
Anteeeclents and Consequences of Consumer Creativity in a
Problem-Solving Context." Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2),
402-411.
Dahl, Darren vV., and Page C. l\~Ioreau (2002), "The Influence and
Value of Analogical Thinking During New Product Ideation."
Journal oflVIarketing Research 39 (1), 47-60.
Dahl, Darren vV., and Page C. lVIoreau (2007), "Thinking Inside the
Box: vVhy Consumers Enjoy Constrainecl Creative Experiences."
Journal oflVIarketing Research 44 (3), 35 7-369.
Dahlen, lVIicael (2005), "The lVIedium as a Contextual Cue," Journal of
Advcrtising, 34 (Fall), 89-98.
REFEREKCES 61
Smith, Robert E., .1\fackenzie, Scott B., Yang, Xiaojing, Buchholz, Laura
l\!I. , and Darley, \Villiam K. (2007), "l\,fodeling the Determinants and
Effects of Creativity in Advertising", l\!Iarketing Science 26
(November-December), 819-833.
Smith, Robert E., Chen, Jiemiao and Yang, Xiaojing (2008), "The
Imp act of Advertising Creativity on the Hierarchy of Effects",
Journal of Advertising, 37 (\Vinter), 47-61.
Sobel, Robert S., and Rothenberg, Albert (1980), "Artistic Creation as
Stimulated by Superimposed Versus Separated Visual Images",
Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 39:5, 953-961.
Stephens, Edvvard, and Burke, Thomas ( 19 74), "Z en Theory and the
Creative Course" ,Journal of Advertising, 3(2), 38-41.
Sternberg, Robert J. (2006), "Creating a Vision of Creativity: The First
25 Years", Psychology ofAesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S(1), 2-
12.
Sternberg, Robert J. and Lubart, Todd I. (1999), "The Concept of
Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms" in Handbook of Creativity,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Stevvart, David vV., and Furse, David H. (2000), "Analysis of the Impact
of Executional Factors on Advertising Performance", Journal of
Advertising Research (November/December), 85-88.
Stewart, JVIichelle D. and Lewis, Bruce R. (2009), "A Comprehensive
Analysis of ]\ilarketing Journal Rankings" , Journal of J\1arketing
Education, 1-18.
Stone, Gerald, Besser, Donna and Lewis, Loran E. (2000), "Recall,
Liking, and Creativity in TV Commercials: A New Approach,"
Journal ofAdvertising Research, (1\ilay/June), 7-18.
Stuhlfaut, l\~Iark vV. (2011), "The Creative Code: An Organisational
Influence on the Creative Process in Advertising", International
Journal ofAdvertising, 30(2), 283-304.
Sutherland, John, Duke, Lisa, and Abernethy, Avery (2004), "A ]\ilodel
of ]\;farketing Information Flow", Journal of Advertising, 33 (4), 39-
52.
Sutton, Robert I. and Hargadon, Andrew (1996), "Brainstorming
Groups in Contcxt: Effcctivcncss in a Product Design Firm",
Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (4), 685-718.
68 U:.JDERSTANDIJ'\G ADVERTISING CREATIVITY
Taylor, Ronald E., Hoy, l\ilariea Grubbs, and Haley, Eric (1996), "How
F ren ch Advertising Professionals Develop Creative Strategy",
Journal of Advertising, 25 (l), 1-14.
Tellis, Gerald J. (1998), Aclvertising and Sales Promotion Strategy,
Adclison \Vesley, Reading l\1A.
Tellis, GerarclJ. (2009), "Generalizations about Aclvertising Effectiveness
in l\'larkets", Journal of Advertising Research, 49 (2), 240-245.
Thorson, Esther and Zhao, X. (1997), "Television Viewing Behavior as
an lndicator of Commercial Effectiveness", in \Villiam D. \Vells (ed.)
Nleasuring Aclvertising Effectiveness. Nlahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Tierney, Pamela, and Farmer, Steven 1\!I. (2002), "Creative Self-Efficacy:
Its Potential Anteeeclents and Relationship to Creative
Performance", Academy oflVfanagementJournal, 45 (6), 1137-1148.
Tierney, Pamela, and Farmer, Steven ]\iL (20 11 ), "Creative Self-Eflicacy
Development and Creative Performance Over Time." Journal of
Applied Psychology 96 (2), 277-293.
Till, Brian D. and Baack, Daniel vV. (2005), Recall and persuasion. Does
Creativity lV1atter?",Journal of Advertising, 34 (Fall), 47-57.
T oubia, Olivier (2006), "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives" ,
l\1arketing Science, 25(5), 411-425.
Treadwell, Yvonne (1970), "Humor and Creativity," Psychological
Reports, 26, 55-58.
U nsworth, KelTie (200 l), "U npacking Creativity", Academy of
l\1anagement Review, 26 (April), 289-297.
Vanden Bergh, Bruce G., Reid, Leonard, N. , and Schorin, Gerald A.
(1983), "How ]\ilany Creative Alternatives to Generate?" , Journal of
Advertising, 12(4), 46-49.
Vanden Bergh, Bruce G., Smith, Sandra J., and vVicks, Jan L. (1986),
"Internal Agency Relationships: Account Services and Creative
Personnel",Journal ofAdvertising, 15 (2), 55-60.
Vakratsas, Demetrios and Ambler, Tim (1999), "How Advertising
\Vorks: vVhat Do vVe Really Know?", Journal of lVIarketing, 63
a anuary), 26-43.
Vaughn, Richard L. (1983), "Point of Vicw: Crcativcs versus
Researchers: lVIust They Be Adversaries?", Journal of Advertising
Research, 22(6), 45-48.
REFEREKCES 69