Will adland ditch the pitch? Part 3: Is anyone going to actually do it?
A month ago, Mat Baxter asked the industry to join him in ditching the pitch. In this series, Mumbrella’s Brittney Rigby takes that challenge to a range of media agency bosses. Part 3 sees those bosses answer Baxter’s overarching question: Will you actually ditch the pitch?
Group M’s Mark Lollback can’t see #ditchthepitch coming completely to fruition. “It’s unrealistic to do away with pitching altogether. It might make a good headline but it won’t solve the problem,” he says.
Mark Coad also doesn’t count himself as a “fully subscribed member of the ditch the pitch movement just yet”. But PHD’s CEO does think there’s something to Mat Baxter’s industry call to arms.
“It’s a heavy toll on our business, there’s no question about that, and often the amount of work that we’re asked to do is significant. It can often be out of kilter with the size of the prize,” Coad says.
It’s funny it is the larger agencies discussing this, and it’s requirement for reform. The smoke and mirror pitch teams are the one thing they are good at.
But by all means ditch it……
Wow, an analogy involving the buying process for a $10,000 watch. And they say we don’t live in a bubble.
If that’s the way they tell a story when they pitch then it’s little surprise their pitch success rate is where it is .
Why don’t you interview the smaller agencies/independents trying to get a look in… there was a recent “reputable organisation that is trying to make it easier for small business” pitch to multiple agencies. They were looking for an umbrella identity, without providing consumer understanding or positioning strategy yet deliverables were creative concepts which would be tested in consumer research to see which one won. I politely declined based on the quantity of high value work that was required, detailing what was involved in delivering viable concepts that had a chance of winning.
Contained a tad too much detail to appear as just anecdote. But it is worth it. Apparently.
Did we really think Aussie agency leaders would take a stand on this?
For those in the networks, they are simply puppets on strings being pulled by the real top brass in NYC / London / Singapore etc.
The outcomes of this debate (at moment anyway) smack of glad handling the ideas, agreeing to disagree, but ultimately continuing to work with the current status quo. What have any of the leaders interviewed actually said about the way in which they will directly change things? Not much is the answer, save for a number of generic platitudes.
I’m interested to revisit this debate at the end of 2019 to see how much has really changed. Cynically, I’d proffer not much.
Fair play to Mat Baxter for kick starting this debate though.
Clients: If your agency is forever in pitch mode, they must divert resources from existing clients thus providing less to existing clients for the same money. Their focus goes off your priorities onto a probable client. Odds are they will lose the pitch and soon be back in “Now where were we?” mode. In the end most existing clients lose out when their agency focuses on the latest carrot that is dangled in front of them.
When I try and look for actual work by some of the leaders and their agencies mentioned here it can seem pretty thin at times. Some agency websites doesn’t have any case studies at all!
When your only metal on display in the cabinet are culture, best place to work, 30 under 30, leader of the year etc etc of course the client is gong to want to see a very in-depth pitch response as they don’t have much to go on. Regardless of a pitch wouldn’t it be better if agencies talked more about their clients work than the latest (insert buzz word here).
As usual the comments section of a Mumbrella article is full of bitterness and sniping. Aren’t we all bored of this yet?
I highly doubt many of the people quoted in this article, if confronted with a $30m billings pitch, would say no. Some might, be the reality of a holding group company is you have revenue and growth targets or you lose your bonus.
Nice use of the word ‘horologist’ Willie…..so did you buy the Cartier 😉
Sadly the pitching process costs everyone. The agencies that currently engage the agency have inflated rates to cover the overhead costs of other pitches for other brands, the people are taxed by working long hours to cope on top of their billable hours and all the suppliers in the chain offering their IP and time for nothing in the hope they get noticed. This isn’t a sustainable model.
It is cheaper for some agencies to outsource pitch work than it is to use their own people too. In fact much of the pitch work is done in this cost effective way because it is the agency expense. The down side for clients is that the people who come up with the business growth ideas are not there to take the idea forward to market when they win.
I think it is definitely reasonable to expect a creative business to be able to demonstrate thinking and approach, communicate the value of their offer and what might be offered to that client for that project, but to go as far as producing campaign work I personally think that’s a line we need to draw as that has a commercial value that is being undermined. In my experience without the strategic understanding the creative tends to be off strategy anyway.
perhaps we should return to the good old days of lunching and bribing instead?
far cheaper and more fun