“What is wrong with advertising research and how can we fix it?” – An Interview with Patrick de Pelsmacker
“What is wrong with advertising research and how can we fix it?”
– An Interview with Patrick de Pelsmacker
This spring, Charlotte Lamerz (research associate and PhD student, Chair of Marketing, University of Wuppertal) had the opportunity to interview Patrick De Pelsmacker about the challenges and developments in advertising research during an international research week at the University of Wuppertal. As part of an interview series focused on the future of advertising research, all winners of the Flemming Hansen Award will be interviewed by PhD students, with the interviews being published periodically in the EAA newsletter.
Charlotte Lamerz and Patrick de Pelsmacker in the museum of the Wuppertaler Schwebebahn, May 16th, 2024 (source: Steffen Prior).
Charlotte: Hello Patrick, thank you very much for taking the time for today’s interview! I would like to talk to you today about your experiences as an expert in advertising research. Your background is particularly impressive for aspiring researchers like me. Before we dive deep into the challenges and the future of advertising research, I would like to know: how did you develop your passion for advertising research?
Patrick: Well, in your question there is an assumption that I have a passion for advertising research. Which is not at all the case (laughs). I mean, I accidentally ended up where I am. Like a lot of things in my life, it just happened. I wanted to stay at the university because I liked research and teaching. But I didn’t have a clear idea of what I wanted to become an expert in, and it certainly wasn’t advertising research. I don’t have a passion, and I never developed one. I probably would have done other things just as happily. For me, it’s about developing something, to get acquainted with it, and to do research about it. Not so much about the specific topic of research. People always ask me, why are you so obsessed with advertising? I’m not obsessed with advertising. No, I don’t have a passion.
“The biggest problem is that we do research by studying something very, very specific”
C: In your paper, “What is wrong with advertising research and how can we fix it?” you discuss various deficiencies. Based on these observations, what do you predict will be the major challenges in advertising research over the next decade?
P: I think one of the biggest problems is that we do research by studying something very, very specific – me to begin with, 90% of my research is like that. So, we do research on tiny little things that are perfectly designed as a study, but that will never be of any use to anybody. I was the guest editor of a special issue of the International Journal of Advertising, and one of the articles was about the academic-practitioner divide. We interviewed 40 practitioners and a couple of academics in seven or eight different countries and asked them the same questions about the relationship or lack of relationship between academia and practitioners. The picture was devastating! I mean, they are two completely different worlds. We do things that nobody is interested in. We write in such a way that it cannot be understood by a normal person. The texts are too long, they are not written attractively. We are always late, never on time. When practitioners get academic articles, they are utterly bored. On the other hand, academics don’t think practitioners are serious enough. So, there is a huge gap between the two and it is getting bigger. The data to do very interesting research on, is in the companies. And we don’t have access to it unless we cooperate with them. Or unless they want to cooperate with us. So, there are the Facebooks, the Instas, the Googles, and they are sitting on a data gold mine. But they just don’t think that we have the expertise to do something with it.
“Both sides of the field have to adapt – the industry and us”
C: So, in your opinion: How could the field adapt to address these challenges?
P: Well, both sides of the field have to adapt – the industry and us. The industry is interested in quick insights, a little bit quick and dirty, as long as it gives them a useful piece of information. Well, we are the exact opposite. We are not interested in quick wins, we are interested in perfect designs and perfect conclusions. I don’t really have a solution to that. Except, first of all, to build trust between the two. It’s not impossible to learn how to live with each other’s priorities. So, I think it can work. But you have to build trust and a network. And secondly, we have to get access to all this online data and insight. Otherwise, we will be hopelessly behind in five years. Because the only thing we keep on doing is setting up little experiments with 35 students over a tiny little contribution that’s not going to help. But to be honest, I’m not sure it’s that easy, because academics are often very stubborn. I think the problem is also that the whole ecosystem of academia is locked into its own logic and its own dogmas. So, it would be very, very difficult to get them to behave differently.
C: What advice would you offer to young researchers starting their careers in advertising research? How should they navigate the potential pitfalls?
P: One thing, of course, are practitioner workshops or info days of advertising agencies. Not all of them are equally interesting, but at least they are talking about the things that keep them busy today and not the things that keep us busy. So that would be one solution. And also, I think we should be more open to practitioner sources. If you Google for 50 seconds, you will find 55 blogs from all kinds of consultants and agencies. So, you learn what keeps them busy by reading what they do. And that is a rich source of inspiration. Also, invite guest speakers to courses. They often come up with insights that you hadn’t even thought of. And there are also academic institutions like the Marketing Science Institute. Every two, three years or so, they update a list of upcoming emerging issues and under-researched problems. And very often they are embedded in practice. So, more contact with the practical world.
“Practitioners can be a very inspiring source for academic research”
C: What steps should researchers take to ensure that their work is both academically demanding and practically useful to advertising professionals?
P: I think you can be academically demanding if your starting point is relevant to practitioners. I mean, you can take any topic in the world and do serious academic research on it. But it starts with the question: what do I want to study? And there’s nothing wrong with going to practitioners for inspiration. You could say, we invite four people who have a lot of expertise in today’s advertising world. And we let them talk about what’s important to them, what they’re struggling with. Very often they have databases, but they don’t have the time or the expertise to do research with them. They may have a degree, but it’s been a long time. So, they can always use some help with research. Companies like Google or Meta have hundreds of very decent researchers for sure. They don’t need us. But there are also small companies. They’re not Google or Meta. And they might appreciate our help.
C: With regard to the rapid development of digital technologies: what do you think will be their role in advertising research?
P: It will be a key role for sure. And I think it’s inevitable that it’s going to be used. And I also think that we shouldn’t be against it. It’s like being against a laptop or Word or PowerPoint. It’s going to stay, everybody’s going to use it. So why bother trying to stop it from academia? That would be the silliest thing. But it should be controlled and used carefully because artificial intelligence (AI) or generative AI are full of mistakes. For example, I asked an AI three times: Who is Patrick De Pelsmacker? The three answers I got were all equally wrong. My birthday was on a different date each time. On the other hand, I was looking for a good theory for something I’m working on. AI came up with some good suggestions that I didn’t think of.
C: You said that we are too slow, and practice is faster than us. Do you think new technologies might be a help to close the academic-practitioner gap?
P: I don’t know. It is for sure useful. AI will enable us to do things faster and more thoroughly. It will for sure free up time. The question is how do we fill this time? The procedures may be as fast as you want. The problem is that 99% of us are pathological procrastinators that postpone everything until it’s almost too late. For example, if you say: With AI, I could do that task within 14 days, but you’re going to wait until the 13th day before you start…(chuckles)
C: What is the best advice you have received for your own career?
P: I was going to say: None (laughs). I can’t remember ever having received advice that steered my career in a certain direction. But I’m also not receptive to it. I don’t take advice… except from my wife. (pauses). But then I remembered some advice from one of my professors in my last master’s year. I was a good student, and he suggested that I think about applying for a Ph.D. scholarship. And then I thought, I don’t really know what to do with my life. Honestly, I had almost finished my master’s degree, and I didn’t know what I was going to do for the next month. So, I thought it wouldn’t be bad to work at the university. At least I would have a project for four years and then I could see what to do next. And that was probably the best advice I ever followed. There was probably other good advice, but I didn’t follow it (chuckles). I’ve never planned anything in my life. I did many, many different things in my life, all in academia. But I stumbled over them, you know. I stumbled from one silly adventure to the next. I’ve been a dean for five years because the right person asked me at the right time. And I thought: Why not? I’ve never thought for more than five minutes about a decision.
C: Do you regret any of that?
P: I mean, I probably would regret little things. Stupid things I said, or somebody that I insulted without really being aware of. But no, I have never regretted it. I’ve always liked to be in front of a classroom and to work with students. Until the last day. I’ve done that all my life. I loved to do it. But now, since my retirement, I must say, it has been enough (smiles). I’m also completely fed up with arrogant, incompetent reviews of papers. I thought that I was very happy that I wouldn’t have to do that anymore. But now I fill my days, writing papers and submitting them to the journals. But I don’t regret that either. I could say no, right? It’s very simple. But I never say no (laughs). Still, no regrets.
“Today, the academic world is a cut-throat and very stressful”
C: Would you recommend young researchers like me to go in the same direction as you?
P: I wouldn’t… Not anymore. When I was a PhD student, the academic world looked completely different and much easier for young researchers like you. Now it’s cut-throat and very stressful. It’s improving a little bit, but if you want a job in academia, it’s a tedious process. It takes time and sometimes you have to be a bit lucky. When I was a young academic, there were a lot of vacancies and very few people. So I got a job very easily. But it’s completely different today.
C: One last question, Patrick: What would you have become if you hadn’t become a professor of advertising research?
P: If I could start all over again, I would probably study history.
C: Why history?
P: I’m very intrigued by history. Of course, back then my parents said: ‘You’ll never get a job in history.’ Which, of course, is not true. But they couldn’t imagine what I could do with history. There are lots of history books that I like to read. You don’t have to be an academic historian to understand these books. So, I’m into history. It’s a missed opportunity. But I have had all my life to read those books. And as a retired person I can do it as much as I like. I don’t really mind. I think I had the best possible job in the world.
About Patrick De Pelsmacker: He is Professor of Marketing at the University of Antwerp and one of the most cited advertising researchers in the world. For his outstanding contributions to advertising research, he was honored with both the Flemming Hansen Award and the Ivan L. Preston Award. His research interests include the study of advertising effectiveness and online consumer behavior.
About Charlotte Lamerz: She is a research associate and PhD student at the Chair of Marketing of Tobias Langner at the University of Wuppertal. She is currently in the second year of her PhD program. Her research focuses on brand routines promoted by influencers on social media platforms.
