Brands need to trim the fat, starting with waste-of-money agencies
COVID-19 has forced brands to tighten their purse strings and examine the value of their agency partners. And according to Azadeh Williams, many of the PR and marketing agencies that have been overcharging and under-delivering are finally being exposed.
The recent shifts in marketing spend and budget cuts have pushed many organisations to ‘trim the fat’. And the PR and marketing agencies that have been overcharging and under-delivering are being exposed for what they are – a big waste of money.
Now, with the purse strings tightened, businesses are starting to weed out the wasters, and yes, some of the world’s biggest media and marketing agencies are taking a hit.
Many agencies are a waste of money, says Williams
after I read the cliched first paragraph, I was expecting the rest of the article to be full of hackneyed & prejudicial bland sweeping statements and meaningless, self serving recommendations.
and so it proved.
Drop bad agencies, hire good one’s. Revolutionary.
Bitchy agencies responding of course
I have so many clients come to me because they are sick of paying thousands a month and not getting results. You can pay less for a smaller boutique agency and get better results. I’m glad the tide is turning. Boutique agencies like mine will greatly benefit. Usually the big agencies charge like a wounded bull because they have massive overheads (I was shocked to see the cost of a media call from a huge agency that delivered only 4 results) yet continue to win the business because ‘bigger’ is seen as better. It’s not. The client gets the junior with little experience and pays a senior price.
Who is going to hire this agency if this is what she thinks the in house role really does…………also posting this op ed in a publication designed to be read by marketers is also probably not the smartest move…….
“Many traditional in-house marketing roles, especially in large multi-national organisations, offer cushy, six-figure salaries, involve more meetings over coffee than output, and feature plenty of time to play ‘post-it bingo’ on whiteboards and call it ‘strategy by scrum’. But slowly, these organisations are taking a look at what smart, forward-thinking marketing agencies deliver, against what their in-house teams do (or don’t do), and realising where the value really lies.”
Selve-serving BS? Yep, it’s a problem. I see quite a bucket load of it above. The ‘insights’ here are hardly new, but remarkably self-serving in this context. And who precisely in PR is still sitting on fat retainers? I’d like to know. There is nothing actionable or insightful in this entire ‘opinion’ piece.
Clients WILL pay for thinking. Try it sometime.
Good summary articulating what many are now doing, yes easy to throw stones from the big towers in the city but this is the way forward for the astute marketer.
I read this article when it was first published in 1988.
I agree, as a National Marketing Manager and Consultant. I have worked with other senior marketers that have hidden in meetings and passed over their responsibilities to agencies that substantially over charged them for no results. Industry accountability is slowly coming for internal marketers and agencies. It is a good thing for our industry and it is needed.
Wow Mumbrella, are you really this desperate for a debate? Even LinkedIn would think twice about self publishing this, which is where it should be at best. Vacuous self publicity based upon chucking a load of cliches and sweeping statements against the wall. Bring back Kerwin Rae….
Clearly they missed the ‘know your audience’ part of the agency value proposition..
A little ‘astute marketing’ test for you, Azadeh. Ask a friend who is not in marketing what they think this means: “your marketing partner should offer an integrated media, inbound and marketing strategy that’s tailored to your specific needs”. The small business owner looking for ‘some marketing’ in the post COVID world will react like your friend. Jargon like that is pure gibberish and meaningless to the average business owner and yet marketers fill countless powerpoint slides with it. If you can’t explain what you offer in a clear and precise manner then you are unlikely to win their business. If you don’t realise that their ‘specific needs’ will always be ‘more sales’ then whatever you recommend will be akin to ‘strategy by scrum’.
Agree 100%.
Mumbrella is suffering a major decline in quality.Was this a paid advertorial?
Big picture here is 50% of agencies are not going to survive due the revenue black hole. Agencies can talk ROI, its one thing to claim and another to prove with a massive disconnect in-between. This is the challenge and I’m afraid the virtue signaling, responsible environmental / cultural / gender divisive marketing will not cut it in this environment. Back to ECON101…
This article will no doubt hit a raw nerve with senior agency folk as it’s a perfect summary of the blatant raw truth.
Things are progressing so quickly and it’s exciting to see new models, structures and processes emerging that clients absolutely love – especially those from former big agency side backgrounds and know exactly whats what.
Wake up we are in the 21st century.
Boutique?? Maybe you mean small and not growing!!!
Having left a large agency for a smaller one I wholeheartedly agree. Thanks for being brave enough to speak up about it.
Loving reading these comments as they offer a beautiful insight into our community.
On the affirmative:
Yes, this is so true and we are experiencing it ourselves. Clients have more choice than ever before and have been burnt by bigger agencies.
On the opposition:
How dare you! I’m holding onto my inflated salary job and overpaying clients like a NRA member would his automatic machine gun under the second amendment.
I for one would like to raise a toast to Azadeh for having the balls to put the truth out there and not care about the backlash of those that are trapped in a bubble. Bravo!!!
In house marketers wasting time in post it meetings?
That’s bad management and bad hires, not a reason to go to an agency.
In house there’s far greater accountability, better brand knowledge, lower hourly rate, no hours spent schmoozing and no mark up – if you get the right people.
Thanks for this, I can definitely relate to the sentiment in this article having been sold what turned out to be nothing more than marketing hubris from a large well known marketing agency a couple of years back. Good to know there’s a shift in servicing ethos at the boutique level. Seems like you’re ruffling a few feathers on here from your fellow marketers and dare I say it, other agencies. Power to you.
What a strange comment. Are people not allowed an opinion? What about someone like Mark Ritson… Should he be banned from Mumbrella or any other publication? Right ok…
The author has been transparent around who they and what they represent. You could try the same.
I was thinking the same – belittling your clients is a great way to get work!
What I see in the in house marketing teams who are really stepping back to take a look at themselves is building out in house teams. No one cares for your business like someone who works for it. I’ve never seen an agency, big or small, who had the care and passion or got the results of a well run marketing team. Often run by a marketing leader on a ‘cushy, six-figure salary’ – which FTR they are well and truly earning through their hard work and results.
So the full service marketing agency person slams the boutiques as money wasters. Here’s a tip – the power of influence comes from skilful employ of subtly. Perhaps this should be relabelled ‘Advertorial’?
It’s not hitting a raw nerve because its true, it’s inviting comment because it’s patronising and a blatant promotion.
Agree with Agency Boy!
Mark Ritson is allowed controversial opinions and cliches. Reading the comments I’m also sending some ‘mansplaining’ here and ‘shushing’ an outspoken and highly accomplished female trailblazer…. Well done Azadeh for speaking up!
Subtlety.
it’s not slamming boutique agencies at all, just agencies that over charge and under deliver, or focus on very limited activities without demonstrating ROI.
Incorrect, this is not about gender this is strictly about really bad content. Whether you like it or not (and many don’t) least Ritson has a highly thought through and original take on the marketing world, drawn from real world experience in the discipline he chooses to discuss. The problem here is you have one of a growing number of ex-journalists trying to become marketers, but not realising the source of their ability to create a story was based upon taking expert’s opinions and communicating them succinctly. There is no value in this rehashed argument from a small agency trying to a discate that potential clients use them rather than established agencies (with a heritage and pedigree) Throw on top a badly crafted selection of insults towards your prospective pipeline and I think contradicts itself so badly, no further explanation is necessary,
As if anyone working in this industry can’t point to at least 1 if not more ‘heads of marketing’ or senior people who they’ve asked the question what does that person do? or the phrase ‘the agency knows our brand better than we do’ that person is who this article is describing.
Surprised they think the brands leave those agencies though unless their hands are forced – the troughs are generally kept pretty well filled up to keep those agency relationships.
Wow. So rude. Do you bring these types of communication skills to your business? Some of us CHOOSE to stay small because it suits our lifestyle. Not everyone wants to be a huge business. Wake up and realise not everyone wants what you want.
Unlike you, I also don’t have to hide behind a screen and am happy to share my name and business details. I made a CHOICE to keep my business small to further my career in the film industry.
..indeed, while offering nothing of real value.
Do you have proof journalists don’t make great marketers or PR experts? Pretty sure most journalists have a very hard frontline experience of getting hit hard every day with hundreds of poorly written, ill conceived and off the mark pitches from agencies, and realising clients need better direction…
I guess it’s a matter of opinion depending on the perspective you see things from. I see it as the raw truth because I have experienced it first hand from both perspectives, as have many other consultants etc that are thriving. If you feel it’s patronising, then write your own article or counter comments.
What is PR if it’s not a bit of self promotion?? The author has balls for putting herself out there without tiptoeing around afraid to offend people.
Bad content? This is 100% accurate (if you have left the fake bubble you are stuck in).
Azadeh also has drawn from real world experience in the discipline she chooses to discuss… Or are you calling this fake news?
With 20+ years in the advertising and marketing industry to now only working with smaller consultants I can say you sir, are wrong.
Go and ask CMO’s who they would rather work with? You are starting to become irrelevant my old friend… Welcome to 2020 and the age of remote working, nimble and effective smaller operators, the de-mystifying of agency secrets and processes, the rejection of slow and stodgy processes, the breakdown of multiple departments into one, the eye rolling long timelines to go to market, the junior creatives being handed the accounts, the fake culture created by larger agencies to keep overworked staff invested into something more meaningful, the award entries and shows, the gloating about awards, the fake campaigns to win awards, the inflated rate cards based on operating costs (high) and head hours (high), the 18 meetings with 9 people all having a say to approve a campaign concept…. You want more?
Now please tell us why heritage and pedigree should be held in such high esteem? Would love to hear it.
I can’t wait for the counter article from the senior advertising guy/director about why the established, larger, traditional style of agency remains an efficient, cost effective and nimble way to produce commercially effective marketing communications…
The popcorn is in the microwave.
I have interviewed multiple candidates from independent agencies in my time at a few big agencies.
Many of them haven’t had the training or specialization to perform adequately at the exec or manager level roles due to the clients they work on and from what the independent agency can offer.
Big agencies may have more baggage which can be clunky, but they can offer so much more in terms of development and scale for both clients and staff.
Correct, but just knowing what is crap is not an ‘insight’
I’m looking you up – boutique agencies are the best ! thank you for staying real…. I’ll be in touch soon 🙂
I swear to god Mumbrella recycle this exact same opinion piece every four weeks under the guise of a new author
Don’t fall for it people.