Back in 1991, the writer and academic Robert Grudin published a fantastic book called The Grace of Great Things. The back cover offers this excerpt:

“Creativity is dangerous. We can not open ourselves to new insights without endangering the security of our prior assumptions. We can not propose new ideas without risking disapproval and rejection.” 

These days, Grudin might say, "Technology is dangerous." Or "Metrics are dangerous." Perhaps even "Media is dangerous." But dangerous to whom?

It's surprising to witness the advertising agency—the entity most aligned with creativity—as it struggles to evolve and accept newer versions of itself. Why are we clinging so—to the familiar business practices, to the routine heirarchy—when those are the very same qualities we propose to rebel against in print and television concepts? Why are we acting so entitled?

Advertising award shows celebrate ideas that we supposedly haven't seen before. We cherish ads which (as Mark  Fenske put it) cause us to respond, "I never thought about it that way."

Yet, technology, metrics/analytics and media are causing marketers to look at what an ad is, can be, should be—as well as who its creators can be—differently than anyone has before. The entitled ad agency seems to reject the Technologist, the Planner with an ROI scheme, or the Media rep as people who create ads. After all, they aren't writers, art directorsm creative directors or designers.

But these people have ideas. And that's all that should matter.