We're overly critical of our own work: Anisha Iyer on India's performance at Cannes Lions

India's performance in the Media Lions category at Cannes Lions 2026 sparked conversations back home. While the country secured two shortlist spots, neither entry converted into a Lion. At the same time, Latin American and Western markets dominated the winners' list, prompting questions about representation, cultural diversity and whether Indian work is being adequately recognised on the global stage.

Speaking to IMPACT Magazine's Editor, Neeta Nair at Cannes, Anisha Iyer, CEO of OMD India and a member of this year's Media Lions jury, offers an insider's perspective on how the judging process unfolded. While she believes the winners fully deserved their recognition, she argues that India's bigger challenge lies elsewhere: not enough work is being entered in the first place. Iyer also shares her views on the growing influence of regional storytelling, the lessons India can learn from Latin America and why the ongoing Omnicom-IPG consolidation presents more opportunities than challenges for agencies.

Read the edited excerpts below:

India secured two shortlists in the Media category this year but no wins. Having judged the entries yourself, do you think Indian work simply wasn't as strong as the global winners?

First, congratulations to everyone who won in the Media category. The winning work was exceptional and deserved to be celebrated. Congratulations, to everyone who made it to the shortlist. There were close to 2,000 entries and only about 100 made the shortlist, so being shortlisted is an achievement in itself. I can say that confidently because I was part of that evaluation process. That said, the issue wasn't just that India had two shortlisted entries that didn't convert. The bigger issue is that there weren't enough Indian entries in the first place.

My message to India, South Asia and Southeast Asia is that we're often overly critical of our own work. We tend to underestimate what deserves to be entered. If a campaign has delivered a strong impact and solved a problem creatively, submit it. There are enough people around the world willing to appreciate great work. You are not very far away from the world's truth, which essentially means that your work cannot be so dismally different from the world's truth. We see Indian work shining at local and regional award shows all the time. If that's the case, then why isn't more of it being entered at Cannes?

My request is simple: do great work, but also enter more work. The more we enter, the more India is represented and the more diversity of Indian creativity gets showcased globally.

Interestingly, both shortlisted Indian entries this year were linked to the Kumbh Mela. They succeeded in communicating their cultural context clearly, and that context was respected by the jury. Agencies should not hesitate to enter region-specific campaigns either. Even if a campaign works brilliantly in one state or one market, enter it. There is a lesson to be learnt from Latin America. They do an excellent job of celebrating smaller corners of their countries and cultures. We should do the same.

Many of the winners this year came from Latin America and Western markets, while APAC seemed less represented. Given the industry's focus on diversity and inclusion, why do you think that happened?

I don't think representation within the jury was the issue at all. In fact, we had a wonderfully balanced jury. Our Jury President was from Singapore and of Indian origin. We had representation from India, South Africa, Dubai, Brazil, Mexico, Spain and the US. The winners deserved to win regardless of where they came from. They demonstrated strong brand impact, smart use of modern media and marketing tools, effective targeting, innovative thinking and creativity at the centre of the solution. The fact that several winners came from certain regions was an outcome, not an input. Geography wasn't a consideration in the judging process. Rather than looking at it as a regional imbalance, I see it as an opportunity to learn. These campaigns show where modern marketing is heading. The goal should be to take inspiration from them and come back with even stronger work next year.

You mentioned the relatively low number of Indian entries. Given the amount of consolidation happening globally, did that play a role in reducing participation this year?

I don't believe the structure of organisations has anything to do with whether great work gets entered or celebrated at Cannes. It comes down to our own standards, our confidence in the work and whether we feel proud enough to submit it. Whether companies merge, operate independently or sit under the same holding company has very little to do with the quality of creative work. So, no, I don't think consolidation is a valid explanation for fewer entries. That said, because of consolidation, I do get to cheer for a much larger family now.

With Omnicom and IPG coming together globally, what does the expanded network mean for OMD India specifically?
For any agency, the biggest advantage comes from the capabilities the wider group can provide. Omnicom Media in its new avatar is significantly more powerful than it was before. If I look at it from an OMD perspective, I now have access to a broader and deeper set of solutions. That expands the opportunity window considerably. As an agency leader, I see this as a positive development. We were already operating in a strong arena, but that arena has suddenly become much larger. There is far more to explore, more capabilities to leverage and more opportunities to create value for clients. I'm very optimistic about what comes next.