These days, the speed of change can feel blinding. This is particularly true if you are in the creative space.
Our work with Microsoft, now a finalist for the ARF David Ogilvy Award, challenged us to rethink what creative testing could look like. That led us to Qual-at-MASSIVE-Scale (QAMS, for short): an approach built to help research keep pace with creative, while preserving the depth and human understanding that make insights useful.
Take a look at what this has changed, and what it means for you:
Myth #1: You have to choose between a metrics-driven scorecard and deep qualitative insight.
Reality: For decades, that choice was real. Quant studies gave you the scale to score an ad, but no “why.” Qual gives you the depth to understand why, but with a small sample.
For Microsoft, we couldn’t afford to choose between the two, but simple AI-enabled tools weren’t enough to deliver the depth needed to understand the consumer. That pushed us to design a new approach to provide standardized metrics for benchmarking, and the customer language that explains the story behind the score.
What changed: We no longer have to choose between the score and the story. By bringing qual to scale, we can give creative teams both, at the cadence of the work.
Myth #2: Ad testing kills creativity.
Reality: It can feel that way when it arrives as a scorecard with a single number that grades the ad, hands the verdict to the creative team, and freezes future work based on the highest-scoring version.
We applied rigorous scoring paired with rich qualitative feedback, wave after wave. Creative teams got the customer language behind the reaction, patterns across executions, and signals about what to try next.
What changed: Instead of telling creative what won, testing became insight into what to do next.
Myth #3: A great consumer insight can carry a year of creative.
Reality: In fast-moving categories like AI, media, retail, and B2B tech, what resonated in Q1 may not hold in Q3.
What sustains a campaign isn’t one big insight. We have the power to provide a rolling understanding of how people are responding as the creative and market evolve.
What changed: New tools with an experienced team make it economical to test wave after wave, so your insights can keep up with the market, not just the launch.
Myth #4: Testing every piece of creative is too slow and too expensive.
Reality: With traditional qual, that was true. Modern methodology has changed the math.
Microsoft has now run over 20,000 evaluations through Qual-at-MASSIVE-Scale. With the help of technology, testing can happen at a scale and cadence that wasn’t practical before.
What changed: When testing every execution becomes economical, creative teams shift from making one big bet per campaign to learning from every wave.
We’re excited to see this work recognized as a finalist for the ARF David Ogilvy Award for Best Use of Emerging Technology. The winners will be announced October 14, and we’ll be there in person. Wish us luck!
