±±¾©Èü³µpk10

In 2001 the Labour administration spent £143m on

above-the-line ads - 39% more than the previous year - catapulting a

government to the top of the annual spending table for the first time.

And since Labour came to power, its total communications spend has

nearly trebled, from £111m in 1997-1998 to £295m in

2000-2001.

"Yes, the budget has grown, but in real terms the Tories spent more on

two occasions in the 80s," says a Number 10 spokesman. He says the

government is performing a vital task in communicating policies to its

stakeholders.

But, as for all marketers, the question is not how big the budget, but

how effectively it is used.

"If Labour improved its appalling record on public sector staff

retention it would not need to spend millions of pounds recruiting new

nurses and police officers," says Liberal Democrats Treasury spokesman

Matthew Taylor MP. "Advertising should not be undertaken unless there is

clear evidence of its efficacy."

So, the furore over the size of the government's adspend may be

misleading - the question is whether Labour can justify its claim to be

one of the UK's most effective spenders.

Government messages are often unpalatable - convincing adults that they

have a literacy problem or encouraging teenagers to use contraception

are not the easiest of briefs.

Whitehall departments' communications directorates and COI

Communications, the agency that handles the vast majority of government

campaigns, shoulder the responsibility for these tasks.

The COI and its roster agencies claim that it is one of the UK's most

effective spenders. Chief executive Carol Fisher says the COI applies

more than 20 campaign effectiveness measures, including the quality and

quantity of responses, the relationship between attitudinal shift and

behavioural change and responses against media placement.

It also uses a database of pitch-conversion analysis, industry pricing

benchmarks, media auditing systems and annual agency performance league

tables; these are collectively aimed at offering the COI and its clients

a sophisticated overview of the value-for-taxpayers' money of government

marketing initiatives.

New territory

And as Fisher points out, many government campaigns are planned with no

normative data on which to provide a foundation. Targeting an ad aimed

at helping ethnic minorities quit smoking, for example, meant the COI

had to set goals with no previous benchmark.

Mark Bainbridge, marketing director of the Army Recruiting Group, says:

"External market pressures and internal requirements to recruit more

people of higher quality mean we have had to become more sophisticated.

The Army recruitment campaign has 93% brand awareness, but that in

itself is not enough. We have to help people get over an initial wall of

fear and commit to a life-changing decision."

As a result, the Army's marketing strategy has moved away from

above-the-line brand-building to place greater emphasis on relationship

marketing initiatives such as its Camouflage scheme for potential

recruits. From an initial £2m investment, Bainbridge now

confidently predicts that three-quarters of all junior vacancies next

year will be filled with Camouflage members.

"They are our prime prospects for the future, and it has helped

massively having this brand to act as a way of keeping potential

recruits interested," adds Bainbridge.

The COI's remit has become challenging for the same reason as

encountered by commercial marketers - a cluttered media space. And while

advertising continues to swallow the lion's share of the state's

marketing budget, other methods have become more important, as a direct

result of its need to reach niche audiences, such as the disabled, the

elderly and ethnic minorities.

From the Army's Camouflage programme to the Department of the

Environment's 'Are you doing your bit?' web site to the National Health

Service's Living Health TV joint venture, there is a new willingness

within the government to embrace different routes to the consumer.

Departments as brands

Spend on direct marketing, marshalled by COI DM chief Marc Michaels, has

more than doubled since 1997, and the use of sponsorship has grown from

just £296,000 five years ago to account for more than £10m

of the government's communications spend today.

Right across government, marketing initiatives are being developed with

the intention of creating robust consumer brands. The appointment of

ex-NatWest marketer Ian Schoolar as the first marketing director of the

Inland Revenue exemplifies the trend of developing government

departments as brands in their own right.

This month, the Cabinet Office completed its five-yearly review of the

COI and announced that it was to continue in its role as the

government's independent 'centre of marketing excellence'. It was a

strong endorsement of the agency, which offers services ranging from

digital media planning to brand development and strategic

consultancy.

"We are committed to providing the broadest possible range of

communications solutions," says Fisher. "What the quinquennial review

has shown is that we are working very effectively with our clients, but

we will not become complacent. We will continue to develop our offer,

particularly in areas such as interactive media, and we will improve the

way we integrate our work across government departments."

The COI has been handed the remit to 'join up' marketing thinking across

Whitehall in the shape of a series of research projects aimed at

building understanding of groups such as ethnic minorities and

teenagers. The agenda explains the appointment of agencies such as

Mother and Iris - specialists at engaging young people - following its

advertising and sales promotion roster reviews last year.

At the same time, the COI established the government's first media

planning roster, removing responsibility for planning campaigns from

creative agencies and handing it to shops such as Naked and Manning

Gottlieb Media.

"There has been a sharp improvement in the quality of thinking since the

roster was set up, which was required because there are many new formats

for planners to consider," says Fisher. "The agencies have brought a

fresh dimension to how we approach activity."

The five-year review also produced an enhanced role for Fisher, who

becomes chief adviser on marketing communications and information

campaigns from April. She will report to the Prime Minister's director

of communications and strategy Alastair Campbell on generating best

value for government marketing initiatives. In this additional role,

Fisher will be tasked with strengthening the co-ordination and planning

of all departmental publicity strategies.

The aim is to eliminate duplication - government departments are not

known for communicating well with each other. Fisher stresses it does

not mean that government will necessarily reduce its adspend; rather it

is about improving overall value. "The role of chief marketing adviser

will look at all government campaigns - not just those managed by the

COI. It is an important step in sharing best practice," she says.

Not unexpectedly, the Conservatives have attacked the move. Shadow

Cabinet Office Minister Tim Collins accuses Downing Street of "a naked

power-grab that will corrupt the last remaining vestiges of impartiality

in the civil service".

Government campaigns can by their nature attract controversy. The

Minimum Income Guarantee ads, featuring actress Thora Hird were,

according to the Liberal Democrats, only necessary "because the system

was so complex in the first place".

Recent proposals for an MMR ad push caused a furore when newspapers

demanded that the public be offered separate vaccines until the safety

of the triple-jab was proven.

Under criticism

And at Christmas, the government came under fire when drink-drive

offences rose by 15% - the sharpest increase for five years - despite a

£2m campaign created by Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO. Rather than pull

them, the government has decided to run the ads throughout the year in

the hope of changing motorists' behaviour.

Then there are the allegations that the government has simply been

wasting money on ads. Not surprisingly, Fisher defends them all. "Not

every campaign can be 100% successful. But we are civil servants, not

politicians. We will always advise if we believe a campaign to be

wasteful."

Yet it is hard to support the view that a £3m campaign to inform

workers of their entitlement to four weeks' annual holiday were

"essential".

Fisher denies any politicisation of the COI's work. But her new

responsibility to assess all government campaigns could place her on

collision course with one department that has dispensed with the COI's

services.

The Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) is

seeing pitches with the intention of appointing creative and media

rosters. The department's campaigns have included the 'Think!' road

safety work and a hard-hitting drink-drive push.

A senior official at the DTLR insists the process is a continuation of

the approach to procurement that has seen it run its own research and

design requirements for several years. "We have the expertise in-house,

and we believe that by retaining the commission we would otherwise pay

COI, we can save the taxpayer money," says the official. "We are

proceeding as planned and will announce our new agency line-ups next

month."

But industry sources suggest the DTLR is deluding itself if it believes

it can purchase its £18m-worth of media without the clout the COI

wields.

There is a further cloud on the horizon for the DTLR with the news,

revealed by Marketing last week, that the Government Advisory Committee

on Advertising (GACA) is seeking an urgent meeting with department

officials and Cabinet Office Minister Chris Leslie to address concerns

about the financial basis for the review.

"We are concerned that this may not be the route to achieving best value

for the taxpayer, but we want to meet with officials to get more

information," said one member of the committee, made up of senior

marketers.

DTLR has also upset agencies by calling its review just four months

after the COI finalised its own roster.

The DTLR official refuses to say why the department's tender notice was

not issued before the COI review. And a source within the department

questions the validity of Fisher's chief marketing adviser role.

"Whitehall departments' heads of publicity meet regularly to discuss

their work. There is no need for someone from the COI to have been given

this remit," says the source.

Other publicity chiefs appear not to share this view. None of the

departments contacted by Marketing admitted to having considered

breaking away from the COI.

Mel Brown, deputy head of publicity at the Department for Education and

Skills, believes the rigour applied to each campaign is best handled in

conjunction with the COI. The department's recent work includes an adult

literacy drive created by St Luke's and the Aim Higher initiative to get

more young people into higher education, overseen by DFGW.

Policy or politics?

While the COI remains outside the political sphere, the ads themselves

are rarely without political nuance. As the chief executive of one COI

roster agency puts it: "The campaigns reflect government policy - what

could be more political than that?"

With the introduction of a Civil Service Bill set to consider issues

such as the boundaries between the work of politicians and public

servants, the argument over how taxpayers' money should be used for

information campaigns will continue to rage.

Whatever the outcome, as long as there are nurses, soldiers, and

teachers to be recruited, tax returns to be filed and benefits to be

applied for, the New Labour advertising juggernaut will show little, if

any, sign of slowing down.

COI INCOME FROM GOVERNMENT DEPTS

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01

pounds m pounds m pounds m pounds m

Cabinet Office 0.864 3.017 8.428 5.753

Trade and Industry 4.874 20.477 25.913 20.568

DVLC 1.622 1.919 2.517 4.985

Education/Employment 16.308 25.737 20.482 36.927

Env't, Transport and Regions 10.185 10.725 18.619 18.372

Health 4.249 12.301 17.909 26.208

Home Office 3.816 4.014 9.434 28.414

Inland Revenue 4.907 9.057 15.028 21.103

MoD 27.805 35.592 27.177 32.648

Qualif. & curric. authority 8.347 6.231 9.684 6.524

Social Security 5.417 8.969 8.102 20.934

Other 22.286 35.363 36.617 72.942

Total 100.680 173.402 199.910 295.378

Source: COI Communications (Total communications income) Some department

names changed after May 2001

EXPENDITURE BY MEDIUM

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01

pounds m pounds m pounds m pounds m

Advertising 59.039 105.464 113.493 192.407

Direct marketing 8.489 16.959 26.343 24.168

Events 3.573 5.323 4.048 4.754

Films and TV 3.549 2.584 2.212 1.901

Publications/digital 21.366 21.976 25.670 29.643

Radio 0.303 0.159 0.408 0.386

Regional News Network 6.037 7.397 9.657 12.093

Research 3.572 4.899 7.103 10.050

Sponsorship 1.082 4.282 8.782 10.547

Other 3.153 4.359 2.194 9.429

Total 110.680* 173.402 199.910 295.378

Source: COI Communications

*Includes 0.517 for discontinued services