Here’s to the specialists
In this guest post, Sean Pickwell, boss of specialist celebrity agency Waterfont, decries the rise of the generalists.
Every agency can do anything their client asks right? In these desperate times most agencies will try and get as much work out of their client as possible – it’s logical… isn’t it?
But is the client getting the best work? And what about that old school thought of being really great at what you do?
It’s bloody tough some days, as every agency tries to scope-creep with their clients. Everyone tries to add more services they can offer once they get a hook into a client.
I agree in part, Sean. The drawback with specialists is the narrow focus they bring to the job. A good generalist knows how to put the pieces of the jigsaw together, then hands over to the specialist. Normally that generalist should be the client’s marketing head, corp comms head or HR comms head. What I’m now finding is when you have to combine those disciplines in a comms suite, things start to get a bit hairy.
Clear example today is that we delivered a project to our client who said to their client who said to their client who said to the original client they could do the job.
Basically every PR/design/marketing agency say they can deliver a job but just outsource to freelancers & suppliers to get the job done while they putting their 60% mark up on top for basically cutting/pasting an email. So basically the end client is the one who gets screwed both on price and quality because lack of communication and knowledge.
These days its very uncommon for any agency to recommend another agency or supplier in fear of losing work…
I agree, if you want a specific task done, why not go to the best! People that focus on exactly what you need and know the industry and landscape you are trying to target with your campaign.
Sean,
I think you lost me with the” blah blah blah”.If you have a point say it.
My take is different to yours. Whilst I like specialist skills, I believe that they should collaborate to get the best outcome. We have some of the best specialists in the industry working together with people who they normally wouldn’t. So your argument is destroyed there and then.
People who “specialise” aren’t always the best in their field. I am sorry to say.
Many put on the blinkers, work in self interest and can’t function in a world where you need to team with other specialists
Siloed thinking is a thing of the past.
Clients are tired of wrangling agencies, getting them to play nice together and work to the best idea – wherever it comes from.
I am sure you have excellent skills in what you do. And we would no doubt like to collaborate with you in the future. But will you want to work with people who have also managed to execute excellent, well negotiated celebrity deals on their own?
Interesting one… Depends where you are in the client / agency chain, I think. I see myself as an integrated marketing specialist, which means I offer multiple services – but only the ones that I have proven experience and skills in.
In an environment where consumers are getting their messages from multiple channels / points of contact, it’s increasingly difficult to offer individual services in isolation. Also easier for the client, so they don’t have to manage 4 / 5 / 6+ agencies.
The best thing about a generalist, is that they can take a step back and advise the client that another tactic may work better, or the tactic they first suggested, but integrated with PR, a media launch event, a celeb endorsement, an eDM piece, in-store POS etc. This is how a generalist approach works well, in order to get the best multi-level result for the client. Obviously, this needs to be done closer to the beginning of the planning phase.
However, further down the chain, specialists can / must deliver specific elements of the campaign – like celebrity management.
It all depends on the integrity of the agency to not say ‘yes’ to everything, just in order to line their pockets, but to do the right thing by their client.
If, like I do, a boutique agency does some things in-house and also sets up a JV network to deliver integrated solutions under one roof, that will be easier and possibly cheaper for the client with smaller overheads, that can only be a good thing. It depends on the network, of course, and the trust and relationship between partners to make this work. If done well, this doesn’t need to cost the client any more money either – and everyone wins.
Shock, horror, it may also depend on what the client / customer wants – one invoice – multiple smaller invoices – one point of contact – combined WIPs…..
But, if honesty, integrity, transparency in an open JV offering and wanting to do the right thing by the client is anything to go by, generalist offerings can be done well.