Exploring the Longevity of the 4C Model

For those who know a bit about me, they know I have a passion for strategy frameworks. Just as some people love collecting stamps or butterflies, I delight in gathering strategy frameworks, tools, and models. While some might cringe at these words, thinking, "Oh, but I hate them," there's a key difference between us: I collect and use them in my preparation work, while you often feature them in your client presentations (and mostly, in an inaccurate way). It's amusing how often I've seen these delightful little concepts appear in the slides of those who claim to dislike them the most! Isn't it fascinating how wonderfully complex and contradictory we can be? But that's not the main point here.

Last year, I conducted a survey on Brand and Creative strategy models, frameworks, and tools. I discovered that the most popular framework across both disciplines is the 4C model or one of its variations.

This raised an intriguing question: What do we truly know about this model beyond its application? Do we understand its origins, the reasons behind its creation, and, most importantly, who the author is? In advertising, I've noticed that the real creators often go uncredited, but I believe this shouldn't be the norm. Recognizing and honoring the minds behind these ideas is crucial. So, I put on my detective cap and began to dig deep into the history of the 4C model.

From the stories I've gathered, it appears that the 4C model originally began as the 5C model, developed for management consulting at a firm in the USA. As with all consulting work, it was highly data-driven, focusing on in-depth business problem analysis and detailed reviews. This explains why the model is so nuanced and, to many creative strategists, somewhat unpalatable due to its perceived dryness. While it may not be entirely unique or novel, it remains a highly complex framework. 

Later, Ben Richard, an employee of this consulting firm, transitioned to the creative agency Naked and adapted the model there. At Naked, the 5C model was known as the "Big Tool." During this period, Naked marketed their intellectual property—including the 5C model—resulting in many creative agencies and clients purchasing and subsequently rebranding it to better fit their needs. This likely explains the various iterations of the model, such as the 6C and even 8C versions, which add elements to expand perspectives on communication planning. It also clarifies why clients are so receptive when the 4C or 5C model is applied—they already understand its value and application. 

It’s important to remember that between 2000 and 2010, trading intellectual property was a common and popular practice. Models, frameworks, and various planning tools were crucial for selling planning hours and setting creative agencies apart from the competition. If we were to pinpoint the era when most creative planning models and tools were developed, we’d find that this period was exceptionally innovative in the field—creative in every sense, including the creation of some rather nonsensical ideas.

Over time, Ben Richards introduced the 5C model to Ogilvy, which subsequently disseminated it worldwide through employee training programs. Hence, it is fair to credit Ben Richards as the originator of this framework and acknowledge his name accordingly when employing it.

The 5C model was widely accepted because it ensures that certain questions are asked and relevant data sources are considered. From this perspective, the model is very rigorous. Ogilvy ensured that people in other markets, who were less experienced in strategy and less trained, followed the process of asking the minimum set of essential questions. However, it was not adopted as a problem-solving tool at Ogilvy because it limited planners' skills. Nevertheless, it is a brilliant tool for collaboration with clients, especially for workshops. It allows you to easily explain your thought process and support it with data. The 5C model is designed for an incredibly deep understanding of what is happening in the category and market. What is the objective? And most importantly, what options are we going to reject? It adds a lot of value in this regard, but it never contributed to solving complex brand problems. It is too mechanical, yet very useful for ensuring that people are asking the right questions.

Ogilvy added the 5C model to their internal operating system, Fusion. The next step was to follow up with a media channel planning tool to create a more comprehensive solution for client problems. This tool incorporated consumer journeys and media channel planning. The 5C model primarily consisted of the usual elements: company, customer, competition or category, and culture, with channels added as an additional element. The focus was on identifying the best place or time to engage with people as part of media channel planning. The primary goal was to reach a business objective, define a business problem, and develop a strategy to overcome it. After a while, Ogilvy shifted to employing other tools aimed at fostering more creative solutions. For instance, Ogilvy's Big IdeaL proved to be more inspiring than the 5C approach.

McCann later integrated the 5C model into its Truth To Meaning model, where strategists focused on developing a creative proposition. As opposed to focusing on understanding complex brand issues or business planning, the focus was on communication and creative strategy. However, according to experts, it has not proven to be very effective for this purpose. While it was successful in rationalizing ideas to clients - each "C" offers a solid foundation by exploring intriguing directions based on culture, categories, and consumer insights - it struggled to create truly compelling guidance. Integrating all five elements in a unified way presented challenges, usually creating meaningful connections between only two of them, not all five. Despite this, we can conclude that McCann's model was used more rationally compared to Ogilvy's approach.

A few years ago, I had the privilege of accessing BBH's internal planning tutorials for research purposes. It was intriguing to discover that the foundation of their research methodology is based on a familiar model, albeit a condensed version—the 4C model. In this adaptation, the responsibility for media channel planning is distinctly allocated to another department, separate from the duties of creative planners.

This observation leads me to believe that many, if not most, agencies continue to rely on this model for internal strategy planning. Yet, some may question whether these frameworks still contribute uniquely to our work and solutions. I argue against this notion—fundamental business principles remain unchanged. Businesses aim to sell products or services to interested buyers, amidst competition and cultural influences.

In my view, the evolution from the 2C model, emphasizing company-customer relations (top-down communication), to the 3C model, incorporating company-customer-culture (synergy), reflects this dynamic shift. However, this is merely my observation, which does not undermine the importance of competition and market categories.

Against / In Favour

It's important to recognize that planners approach their work differently, and there is no singular method for planning or strategizing. If there were, our outcomes would lack the diversity and innovation that define our field. However, let's delve into the primary advantages and disadvantages of the 4C model in today's context.

My research on frameworks and models underscores the critical role played by the 4C and 5C models in facilitating effective communication of ideas and fostering shared understanding. This is particularly valuable for new clients and junior team members, aiding in their grasp of proposed solutions and facilitating the learning process. These models provide a structure that guides strategic planning and serves as a foundation for developing strategies.

Conversely, critics argue, that one of the most compelling criticisms of this model is its tendency to foster industrialization or standardization in strategic planning. It often reduces the process of filling out boxes, stifling the emergence of anything truly innovative or captivating. Predictable methods inevitably yield predictable outcomes. This predictability undermines the essence of creativity, which thrives on spontaneity and non-linear thinking. Despite this, many of the widely adopted creative strategy models adhere to linear planning processes.

Another significant limitation of this model is its tendency to constrain the ability to fluidly and freely tell a story through slides. Not all the involved C elements consistently create tension or synergy. Often, tension only emerges between 2 or 3 elements, requiring additional effort to integrate the remaining C's into the narrative.

The third major objection to this model is that it takes a lot of time to explore all the C categories thoroughly. Consequently, there is often not enough time left to understand and find that one inspiring angle from which to derive an interesting solution to the problem.

Finally, the most challenging aspect of the 4C model lies in its middle—the central component. After identifying the most intriguing elements and placing them into their respective boxes, the critical question arises: how do you interconnect this data? The key is to uncover compelling connections that tie everything together seamlessly.

In conclusion, it's important to understand that while agencies like BBH may adopt internal models such as the 4Cs or 5Cs, as planners, you have the freedom to explore alternative tools. Using a structured plan doesn't limit creativity; it invites exploration beyond any single framework. The priority is to craft solutions that are not only innovative and captivating but also resonate with the current communication landscape and steer the future of the brand.

It's also noteworthy that outstanding work existed long before the emergence of the 4C or 5C models. In my view, the cornerstone of our approach is the Planning Cycle by Stephen King, a model we've adapted to meet modern demands. Nevertheless, the fundamental three questions remain at the core of our practice: Where are we? Where do we want to be? How do we get there?

If you're eager to learn more about Creative Strategy frameworks, join my session!

If you're eager to explore a plethora of models and frameworks, my collection features over 130 options for strategic communication, brand planning, audience research, and beyond.

And you can always read more about my research on model origins, here's the Get/Who/To/By model story.