No matter the stated goals of an ad, to be effective it must accomplish three things — capture the viewer's attention, communicate the desired facts or attitudes, and cause the viewer to feel how what they've learned is important and desirable and how a future with the advertised product or service or position will be a better future for them.

See, understand, feel.

If the ad does not grab attention, if it is skipped over, ignored, or even actively avoided, there will be no step two.

How can you grab attention? Graphics are often the tool of choice — a photo or illustration that draws the eye, colors that stand out (bold, subtle, different, non-existent), a composition that causes a pause. But a sufficiently bold (in design or sentiment) headline can perform the same function.

Once grabbed, the viewer's attention must be rewarded. There should be an appropriate connection between what caused the pause and the next level of engagement. While there is often descriptive or narrative copy, it is not a requirement and might even be a crutch, supporting an otherwise pointless or uninteresting message. An image might communicate all that is required. Or text might be unaccompanied by other graphics. Or somewhere in between.

Remember, the point of all the effort to write, design, and otherwise produce this bit of commercial art must be a change in perception. Such changes are greatest when the ad supports the brand image that is developed across all media and touch points, and leads to the viewer believing that their future will be better with the product or service communicated in the ad. It's as simple as that.

Simple to state, perhaps, but not simple to execute.

Perhaps the first step is easily judged — does the ad stop the viewer long enough to allow for step two? This requires evaluating the ad not just in itself, but also in context. How does the ad fit with, or stand out from, the editorial, graphics, layout, and other advertising that surround it and otherwise comprise its milieu? Other parts of the magazine? Other ads in that market space? The general graphic sensibility of the times?

And if it stops the viewer, does the ad impart important information? Does it communicate why this product/service/action is superior to others on offer or, perhaps even better, why the offer has no competition and is desirable in and of itself?

But most importantly, does the information transform a viewer's vision of their future? Does it make the viewer feel? That is the ultimate and singularly relevant question.

So, whether you are creating or judging an ad, be honest with yourself — does it make the viewer see, understand, and feel? If it does, it is working.

If it doesn't, it's a waste of money.