Pushing Back

Push ‘em back, push ‘em back, waaay back. This is what high school cheerleaders cheered decades ago. It shouldn’t be a mantra for advertising people in 2000.

Yet I hear it every day at ad agencies and from clients as well. “If the client doesn’t buy it, we’ll push back.” “If you don’t agree with what I’m saying, feel free to push back.” The intent behind the metaphor is laudable. But the metaphor itself is ill chosen. The relationship between agency and client (or editing house and agency or what have you) is complicated. Yes, it’s inherently adversarial. But not just adversarial. Ideally, it’s some form of partnership. So which aspect of this relationship are you better off emphasizing, partnering or pushing back?

Invoking the notion of “pushing back” immediately reduces the ongoing dialogue between agency and client to a fourth grade playground skirmish. What should be a constructive response becomes contentious. What should be a thoughtful, more or less rational discussion enters the domain of bullies and victims, predators and prey. This doesn’t just sell the process short, it does the process wrong.

First of all, if you’re pushing back, the client must have “pushed”, which is an odd way to characterize their response to your work. More often than not, it would be more accurate to call it balking, expressing reservations, squirming, overthinking -- all of which are very passive responses, almost certainly not intended to provoke. These are not hostile acts, just chicken ones. On that basis alone, “pushing back” isn’t the appropriate response. No one has really pushed you. Why are you pushing back?

If the client really does push you, in the sense of pushing you to make the work better, why would you push back? Wouldn’t you want to embrace and amplify that kind of pushing?

And what does pushing back invite? Escalation. Push, frequently, comes to shove. Now we’ve got a shoving match. Seldom does productive discourse result from shoving matches. If the dialogue escalates further, someone draws a line in the sand. A street fight ensues, or a turf battle, an ego clash, a war of words, or some other such no-win altercation. We don’t want that, do we?

And here’s the part I find most puzzling. Just about everybody is comfortable pushing back. They’re that committed to the issue. But will they fall on a sword for it? Never. It never happens. My entire career I’ve been told by this or that Creative Director or Account Supervisor, “I’ll talk to them about it, but it’s not worth falling on a sword over”. Just once I’d like to hear someone walk into the meeting proclaiming,”I intend to fall on a sword in defense of this ad.” But no. At most, they’ll push back. Of course, it’s possible that when they push the client back, he’ll lose his balance and fall backwards onto the sword. No doubt that would be winning the battle, but not the war.

So, if not pushing back, then what? Perhaps this. Accentuate the partnership. Let’s pretend we’re all on the same side, trying to move the client’s business forward. Given that bold leap, how would we characterize the dialogue that determines every project’s path? The agency recommends an ad, a tactic, a marketing plan. The client objects, disagrees, recoils or merely raises an eyebrow. You can’t push back because, remember, we’re on the same side, shoulder to shoulder, forging a brighter future. Perhaps we can “move the dialogue forward”. The right idea, but it’s a little cumbersome. How about this then. Whatever we do instead of pushing back, there’s a good chance we’ll be re-somethinging. When the client recoils, should we “repeat” our case? Nah, that would just be annoying. “Review”? Still too little forward motion. We could simply “respond” to their concern. That sounds like progress. We could “revisit” the issue. “Re-engage” the client. “Re-emphasize” our position. “Redouble” our efforts to help the client see the wisdom of our recommendation. “Rejoin” or “retort”. That last one starts to sound like we’re suing. Again.

But “rejoin” is promising. Let’s try it out. “The client has their doubts about that headline.” “Well, then we should rejoin them.” Boy that sure sounds like we’re working together as a team, in tandem, everybody rowing in the same direction, blah blah blah. So there’s my suggestion. Don’t push back -- rejoin. Surely you can come up with a better term. Email me your thoughts. Of course, if I don’t like them, I’ll push back.

And besides, in a perfect world, I’d never have to buy another car, much less a Dodge. Or a Lexus. I would just drive my VW bus forever.