Image courtesy
There's a school of opinion, supported by the kind of research that Will has quoted above, that suggests that the best ideas are the product of individual inspiration rather than group effort. The opposing sides of this debate were played out on a recent WORD magazine podcast, but discussed first by Elvis Costello in this interview last year, in the form of what David Hepworth calls 'The Herbie Flowers Argument' which goes something like this: How remarkable is Lou Reed's "Walk On The Wild Side" without that string bass part which is provided by Herbie?
In music, it's not an insignificant question - relative remuneration of band members depends on it, and there are those that suggest that the people who perform on songs but don't write them should still benefit from the revenue for as long as the songwriter. And in spite of the fact that, as Elvis says, there are players that have "lit up records, and that's the thing that you actually remember", many such contributions go largely unrecognised. But then you have to say that none of it would have happened if Lou Reed hadn't written the song in the first place.So my question is this. Is this true of advertising? Are the great advertising and marketing ideas more likely to be the product of individual genius or the sum of collective contribution and inspiration?
