Strategy Vs. Execution

Which works better in advertising, excellent execution of a weak strategy or weak execution of an excellent strategy?

Quite simply, if your strategy is sound, even if it is executed poorly, you fill be far more successful than if you did a great job executing without a quality strategy. We have all seem and heard great "ADS" that made us laugh that did absolutely nothing to persuade us to try a product. For that matter, look at most Super Bowl commercials. Great production but poor strategy in that they do not persuade us to do something different or remember the product.

If you look to a previous post, Morris Hite said, "If an ad campaign is built around a weak idea - or as is so often the case, no idea at all - I don't give a damn how good the execution is, it's going to fail. If you have a good selling idea, your secretary can write your ad for you."

Roy H. Williams, The Wizard Of Ads writes,

"Most advertising professionals are unwilling to question a client's strategy because they're afraid of losing the account. So they happily pretend that "good writing, scientifically selected colors, powerful pictures and reaching the right audience" is all that's needed to make money in America. Give me average writing, bland colors, no pictures, the wrong people and a strong strategy and I'll have to rent a trailer to haul my money to the bank. Could good advertising save a bad restaurant? No, but these restaurants succeed in spite of bad food and no advertising when they're the only restaurant in the hotel. Strategy triumphs again."

So, before you write that next ad, what is YOUR strategy going to be? I have tons of examples of good AND bad ads. Email me if you would like some examples. If you have any examples of great advertising and marketing strategy that seems to work in spite of poor execution, please feel free to post below!