May, 2026.- In the 2026 creative ecosystem, the line separating digital content from physical experience has completely vanished. Jon Lerner, the newly appointed Head of Experiential at Versus, arrives to lead a vision where “experiential” doesn’t simply mean occupying a space, but physically manifesting the soul of a brand. For Lerner, today’s market is undergoing a convergence where brands act like entertainment and entertainment becomes transactional. In this context, Versus doesn’t just execute campaigns; it builds its own “worlds.” Under Lerner’s leadership, the studio moves away from traditional “brand placement”—that forced presence at festivals or events—to bet on “native embedding,” where the brand defines the light, scent, and pace of the room, becoming indistinguishable from the experience itself.
In this exclusive interview with Roastbrief, Jon Lerner breaks down why Versus would rather lose mediocre projects than compromise its appetite for originality. Lerner reflects on ROI not as a creative limitation, but as a design constraint that drives strategy: making “cool” things is easy, but making them measurable is the real business. With a solid foundation of previous projects for giants like Disney, Lionsgate, and Nickelodeon, Lerner asserts that Versus isn’t just entering the experiential field; it already owns it. Discover how his focus on intentionality and his rejection of the “safe” is attracting organizations that want to stop interrupting culture and start becoming the territory where it actually happens.
1. The Experiential Role Defined: Versus is expanding its capabilities into physical and immersive brand experiences with you as Head of Experiential. How do you define “experiential” at Versus, and how does it differ from the way other agencies or studios approach the discipline?
JL Response:
I think it’s true that if you were to survey 10 people in our industry at large, you could get 10 different responses that answer “what is experiential?”.
When we say “experiential”, we’re talking about how companies meet their audiences in the real world. It’s not simply showing up in physical space, It’s a physical manifestation of their brand that connects deeply and inspires through storytelling. We see all the same briefs as our peers – Pop ups, activations, immersive content, etc. What sets us apart from other studios is multi-fold. The first is that we’re not for everyone. The team we’re building isn’t interested in doing things that have been done already. We’re building a team that’s tailored to work with organizations that have the appetite for creativity and originality, and desire to be pushed. For us, a metric of success is the work we lose. I don’t know a lot of studios like that.
2. From Campaigns to Worlds: You noted that brands are “no longer thinking in isolated channels” but rather “building worlds.” What does a “world” look like in practice, and what capabilities must a studio have to build one versus just executing a campaign?
JL Response:
What’s actually happening in the market right now is a convergence that Versus bet on years ago. Brand is starting to act like entertainment, entertainment is starting to act like brand, and the line between content and physical experience is collapsing. Brands are no longer just communicating. They’re building owned environments, owned narratives, owned cultural territory. From large-scale cultural moments to intimate brand environments, the expectation is no longer just to tell a story but to place audiences inside of it. Most agencies, even good ones, are still structured for interruption, for the campaign model where you buy attention and move on. Versus is structured for the converged world where content and experience aren’t separate offerings. They’re one motion.
3. Native Integration vs. Placement: You emphasized that brand experiences should feel “native to their surroundings” and “embed brands within a space rather than placing them into it.” Can you give an example of what “placement” looks like versus genuine “embedding”? How do you achieve the latter?
JL Response:
Think about placement as a brand buying proximity to an audience it wants to reach, but has nothing meaningful or relevant to say to that audience. This happens at almost every music festival. It’s like Salesforce hosting a private brunch at lollapalooza? Embedding is when you can’t imagine the experience without the brand. The brand is the atmosphere. It decided the lighting, the scent, the pace of the room. There’s a version of brand activation where you hand someone a product, and there’s a version where the brand designs the whole context in which that product is the most natural thing in the world to reach for. That second version takes more creative ambition, more strategy, and more trust between the client and the studio.
4. Versus Was Already Here: You said, “Versus isn’t entering experiential. We’re already here.” What work has the studio already done that demonstrates this capability, and what has convinced you that the foundation is already strong enough to build upon?
JL Response:
Not an exhaustive list, but here a few that I can easily point to: Harry Potter activation for Audible. Sphere content for Xfinity and Nickelodeon. Disney Upfronts. BET Awards. Now You See Me stunt for Lionsgate.
The proofpoints in the work the studio’s done to date speak pretty loudly. That does the a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of convincing me. Meeting the team only does Versus favors. Super senior, talented, thoughtful, interested individuals across the board.
5. Intentionality and Investment: You described this moment as being about “intentionality and investment.” What specific investments—in talent, technology, processes, or partnerships—are you prioritizing in your first year to scale Versus’s experiential offering?
JL Response:
Yes.
6. Conviction in a Risk-Averse Market: You’re “stoked” to join a studio “taking big swings and doing it with conviction.” In a market where many brands are risk-averse, how do you balance bold experiential ambition with the commercial realities and measurable ROI that clients demand?
JL Response:
I think these might be 2 separate things to address.
The need for experiences to deliver ROI isn’t new or unique to current market conditions. Measuring success through ROI doesn’t limit creative potential, it’s a factor in guiding strategy and a design constraint. These are good things. Making cool things is easy. Making cool things that deliver real measurable results is why we get paid. That’s the business.
Regarding risk-averse brands, that’s not where we’re putting our effort. Risk-averse = boring. Boring is stuff that’s been done before. Making stuff that’s been done before doesn’t require the same creativity and rigor that we’ve built into the studio. That’s just not our business model and doesn’t play to our strengths as a studio.
