WPP Fellowship Round 2 - Written Up...

You won't have to do this...or WILL you?

Hello gang.

Never let it be said AdGrads doesn't listen to your comments (most of the time, heh).

Several of you have been asking for advice on the second round of the WPP Fellowship. Now, neither Sam nor I had made it to the second round in the past (sob), so I wasn't quite sure how we'd be able to answer this.

Step forward Hamish Cameron, a second year WPP Fellow working at JWT Argentina. He's very kindly written a missive on the topic for us here at AdGrads.

So, without further ado, here it is:

"First of all, well done for making it to the final round; you’ve already made it past 1500 other people to get this far, so you must be doing something right - whatever it is keep doing it. All you’ve got between you and a place on The Fellowship is 2 days of interviews and a presentation, which all sounds pretty gruelling.

My first bit of advice would be to try and enjoy the experience. You’ve done brilliantly to get this far and at this point all you can do is your best; whatever happens, going through this process will help you in the future, whether you get the job or not. You have an opportunity to sit down and speak to lots of interesting people from all areas of Advertising and although it might seem a pretty stressful atmosphere in which to do so, it can be quite fun if you just relax and try to enjoy it.

It might be a terrible cliché, but there really are no wrong or right answers - each interview is just a 20 minute chat on and about advertising and the wider world, and all the interviewers are looking for is whether you are interesting person or not. Do you have an opinion? Can you back that opinion up with a decent argument?

As Will pointed out in his post here , it is easy to turn up with a bunch of quotes from the many books on Advertising that are out there. Regurgitating half of Jon’s books back to him isn’t going to help you much - unless of course you have interesting take/perspective on what you're discussing. In reality, there's only so much “revision” you can do for these final interviews.

Obviously, it is a good idea to have a few campaigns and brands in your head that you’ve thought of and you’d like to talk about, but it is impossible to walk into any interview 100% prepared. It is not a test of your knowledge of Advertising; sure, most of the questions they ask will have something to do with Marketing generally - but I spent 5 minutes in one of my interviews waxing lyrical about how much I loved The Wire, and I certainly hadn’t prepared for that!

The people in these interviews are not looking to embarrass you; you’ve got down to the final thirty and have clearly impressed someone - they are now looking to see how your mind works and to find out more about you. You will have three people in each interview, each from different agencies and in different positions; they will all have their own ideas about who they think is the perfect candidate, so it's impossible to please all of them. Have confidence in your own personality and you should be fine.

After all the interviews are over, you now just have the presentation left. You’re going to be put in a room with five or so other people, and five hours later you’ll be presenting something back to the judges. There isn’t much advice I can give about the group sessions as every group will have a varied set of people with differing personalities.

What I would say is that it isn’t always the loudest person in the room who gets the job. I'm not saying that you should shut up and keep your head down, but if you don’t think you have anything useful to say keep your mouth shut. When you do speak, make sure that you hold your own. If you’re not happy with the direction that the work is going - say something. Equally, listen if someone else has a different point of view. The point of this exercise is; can you all work together and come up with a solution to the problem put in front of you?

When it comes to presenting your “pitch”, don’t worry too much if it doesn’t go exactly how you planned it, or if the guy who volunteered to open leaves out half of the strategy; just concentrate on what your role is. Take your time, think about what you’re saying and more importantly - believe what you’re saying. These are your ideas that you’re presenting - if you don’t sound like you believe in them, then no one will.

When questions come, it is always tempting to leap in and be the first to respond - but only do this if you really think you have a good answer. It will hurt you more if you garble the first thing that comes into your head. If someone else answers the question well then nod and wait for the next question; it doesn’t help anyone if everybody tries to answer every question asked by the judges - it just makes your team look disorganized.

And that’s about it really. Two days seems like a long time, but it will fly by. You’ll get to meet some interesting people (both interviewers and interviewees) and hopefully you’ll find the whole experience enjoyable. After it’s over I wouldn’t go through a deep analysis over how it went; no one ever knows and it will only stress you out if you spend the following three hours going over every single thing you and the other grads said. You've done your best and you’ll find out soon enough.

I hope this helps. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a comment and I’ll try and answer them. Good luck to everyone, and enjoy it!"

I hope that's helpful. Best of luck, guys and gals.

WPP Fellowship Message from Jon Steel...

The Fellowship logo. Usual rules apply.

I've just been sent an email from Jon Steel, who very kindly wrote a Star Story for us last year, about how he got into the business.

This is more a personal reflection on the WPP Fellowship, as he's in charge of seeing the best and brightest get through. So, without further ado, here 'tis:


THE FIRST CUT IS THE DEEPEST

Reflections on a very large pile of applications

JON STEEL, WPP Fellowship Director

Last night, after five straight days of reading and re-reading applications to the WPP Fellowship, I typed the final name onto my list: 108 people, from all parts of the world, who will shortly be receiving invitations to a first interview.

It’s a strange feeling. In part, I am happy because the job is complete, and I know that once again we have assembled a wonderful group of candidates. Yet at the same time I look at the large cardboard box that contains the ‘no’ pile, and wonder, not whether I have made a mistake, but rather how many mistakes I have made. Who have I missed? And what might they have achieved had I decided to place them on the pile on my right, rather than the one on my left?

This year WPP received the highest ever number of applications for our first degree Fellowship program: 1700 give or take a few. Traditionally we have competed not just with other marketing communications companies, but also with management consultants and investment banks. And this year, thanks to the financial crisis, these were looking a little less attractive than normal. To be honest, I had expected that our numbers might rise even further, but many potential applicants have told me that if business isn’t likely to pick up for a couple of years then they are just going to wait, take a gap year (or two) and not bother with applications until things improve.

About five years ago we moved to an online application process, which has generally worked well. This year, working with a new technology partner, we encountered more problems than usual, mostly caused by the incompatibility of new versions of some operating systems. It took one candidate two weeks and a lot of individual technical support to submit her application, but we got there in the end. I wrote to everyone to apologise for any problems experienced, but in the event that the technical issues prevented you from receiving my note of apology… well, we’re all very sorry for any inconvenience that our technical teething problems may have caused. We’ll work very hard to ensure that there is no repeat next year.

Having received the applications, we divided them among twelve current and former WPP Fellows for initial screening. Everyone was given around 150 applications, and I asked them to reduce these to 25. The brief was to identify candidates with high levels of academic achievement, a clear interest in marketing communications, a healthy mix of experience (in life and business), and an interesting perspective on the questions we had asked.

About a week later, I received the top 25 (or, in a couple of cases, 35) from each of the screeners, and a number of late applications that resulted from the technical problems. From a total of around 350, my task was to select a hundred or so for first interview. Most of these interviews will be conducted face-to-face in London or New York, with a few taking place by telephone.

Even though I have been doing this for a few years, I never cease to be surprised at just how difficult it is to distinguish between different applications. It’s much easier to say ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’ than it is to say, ‘no.’ At this stage, everyone has excellent academic credentials and seems to have packed an awful lot into a relatively short life. They are interesting, sometimes witty. One makes a joke about Tony Blair ‘sexing up’ a report on weapons of mass destruction and I laugh out loud. I agree with all the ‘must interview’ recommendations of my screeners, and the ‘yes’ pile grows at an unsustainable rate. I want to meet them all.

Only after reading about fifty applications do I start to get a clear idea of what constitutes first interview material and what does not. I thus have to re-read all of them. I have the first of a series of very bad headaches.

I always start by reading the personal introduction. This has to engage me in the same way that a 30-second commercial has to engage before it can inform. It’s the equivalent of the first conversation at a party. Is this person interesting? Do I like them? Would I like to continue the conversation? I then move on to academic achievement and interests, looking at the choices they have made and judging the balance of analytical and intuitive skills. Finally I read the essay questions, asking whether the applicant has an opinion, whether that opinion is well argued, and how well they write.

Like all recruiters, I admit to prejudices. For example, I will not extend an invitation to a person who does not write well. I hate bullet points. I loathe jargon, and especially the word, ‘paradigm.’ My experience has led me to conclude that people who talk a lot about thinking ‘outside the box’ are generally incapable of doing so. And I believe that if you don’t pay attention to detail in an application, then it’s a good sign that you won’t pay attention to detail in your working life.

This year brought its fair share of basic errors. Applicants wrote about ‘knew ideas,’ ‘pop idles’ and ‘geographical boarders.’ ‘Were’ inexplicably became ‘where.’ In the letter that we asked applicants to write to their favourite teacher, explaining their decision to follow a career in marketing communications, several chose to include that old saying, ‘those who can, do, while those who can’t, teach.’ If insulting their favourite teacher had been a part of the brief then that might have been a good idea. And one guy, quoting me from an article I had written, referred to me as ‘Jon Peel.’ I’ve been called worse, but it really helps to get such details right.

But one person’s loss is another’s gain. As the numbers narrowed I felt inspired and humbled in equal measure. Inspired because of the remarkable things that so many of our candidates have done, and increasingly because they look at the world, and at their lives, in ways that I could not. And humbled because I know that I never would have gained a place on this program myself. At that age, I simply wasn’t good enough. (Maybe that’s still true.)

I’m looking forward to meeting or talking to each and every one of the 108 people who have made it onto my list. They are drawn from every continent on earth, and between them speak a staggering 30 to 40 different languages. A few lucky ones will eventually join us as Fellows. Hopefully we can find places for many more inside our operating companies.

Of course the process isn’t perfect, and I know that in the cardboard box in my office – and even in the larger box containing the applications cut in the first screening – there lie large number of candidates who would, if given the chance, do a great job for us. If you are one of those people, I hope that you won’t give up on this industry, and won’t turn your back forever on WPP.

To everyone who has applied this year, I would like to say a sincere ‘thank you’ for all of your efforts. And I wish you all the best for the holiday season and beyond.

Star Stories: Jon Steel

Here is our first 'Star Story', by Jon Steel, Director of the WPP Fellowship. This will be posted on the Wiki shortly, along with other people's personal experiences of getting into the industry.

THE JOB I ALWAYS WANTED, BUT NEVER KNEW EXISTED.

by Jon Steel


I am writing this by accident.

You see, I was never supposed to work in advertising. I should have been teaching geography and coaching the 1st XI cricket team at some leafy English private school. If I ever really had a plan, that was it.

But twenty-five years after leaving university, I have spent my entire working life in the advertising business. I was a director of a London agency after five years; within ten I was a partner at another agency in San Francisco. Since 2002 I have worked for Sir Martin Sorrell at WPP, one of the world’s largest marketing communications groups.

So where did it all go wrong?

It all started when a friend suggested that I should apply for jobs in the advertising business. He told me that all the good jobs – and therefore the interviews – would be in London. And in London, he said, he knew a number of fun-loving nurses.

That seemed quite appealing. As I started to research the business and its requirements for graduates, it also seemed that advertising might be a good fit for me. In a year spent working for my university’s students’ union I had run advertising for the newspaper and radio station and managed a number of full-time staff. I had been told I could write reasonably well. I had a good degree. Even without the nurses I would have felt compelled to apply.

I applied to about fifteen agencies for a position in account management (the account manager is the person who represents the client’s business interests inside the agency). Within a few weeks I had been rejected by fourteen of them, including all the major agencies owned today by WPP. At the fifteenth, BMP, I was asked whether I might prefer to be an account planner. When I admitted that I had never heard of such a role, my interviewer explained that planners used consumer research to help craft advertising strategy. I told him that it didn’t really appeal to me.

BMP subsequently hired me as an account manager, but only when their first-choice candidate turned them down for a higher paid job in the City. Within six months I had transferred from account management to account planning. (Once inside the agency I had seen the job in a new light and had discovered that it was more interesting than I had initially thought.) Five years later I was surprised to find myself running a planning department in an agency in San Francisco, a job I held for a decade. On my return to the UK – again unexpected – I now find myself working on a daily basis with the management of agencies like Ogilvy & Mather, Grey, Young & Rubicam and J. Walter Thompson, all of whom had rejected me when I first applied a quarter of a century ago.

My career has been full of accidents, and it has also been enriched by others who stumbled into jobs they probably always wanted but never knew existed. At BMP I was trained in the ways of advertising by a man whose degree was in aeronautical engineering, and by another who was a classics scholar; in the ensuing years I have hired lawyers, doctors, and engineers and even a killer whale trainer, all of whom realized along the way that they didn’t really want to be lawyers, doctors, engineers or (surprisingly) killer whale trainers.

I tell you all of this for three main reasons:

First, being focused and having a plan is not all it’s cracked up to be. Over the years I have met a lot of unhappy people who were doing the jobs that their parents and teachers always wanted them to do. I’m sure there are lots of people out there heading for careers in teaching, management consultancy, law, or indeed anything and everything else, who would actually have a lot more fun in the marketing communications business if they knew what it had to offer.

Second, being rejected is not the end of the world. In my case, it was probably a good thing that all those other agencies rejected me when I was twenty-one, because I later realized that I wouldn’t have been happy at most of them. At my first agency I found the perfect job, in an environment that suited my personality. At other places I would have been a fish out of water. With every rejection I also learned some important lessons, and in the end, albeit with a generous dose of luck, I was able to put them to good use.

My final point relates to my experience of rejection. Each year as the director of WPP’s Marketing Fellowship programme I have to say ‘no’ to almost 1,500 applicants, but when I do so I always try to remember how it felt when I was the recipient of such bad news. In those days the news came in a letter. Sometimes they started with “Dear Mr. Steel.” Others addressed me with “Dear Candidate.” One started, surprisingly, with “Dear Shirley.” But one recruitment director took the time to write me a personal letter, and I have never forgotten that. BMP’s chief executive actually took the time to call me after my first interview and explain what was going on. Now I can’t make 1,500 phone calls, but I do always call the one hundred or so interviewees and give them feedback on our meeting. If they haven’t made it I tell them why.

It’s impossible to make anyone feel happy when telling them they haven’t made it, that the answer is ‘no.’ But you should never forget that when you hear that dreaded word, it may well signify the beginning of something much better.

Jon Steel is the Director of WPP’s Marketing Fellowship Programme, and author of “Truth, Lies & Advertising” and “Perfect Pitch” (John Wiley & Sons, NY). He still doesn’t know what he wants to be when he grows up.