Thoughts On Media 360: Future Role Of Agencies Examined
Agencies were left with much to ruminate over at the end of Media Week‘s Media360 conference last week. The position, resources and abilities of media and creative agencies were regularly called into question – and often the criticisms came from within.
“I have not yet seen an agency group with a clear view of where digital fits in,” commented Jon Wilkins, partner at Naked. Silos won’t work, Wilkins told delegates; suggesting that agency self interest (and media owner self-preservation) was too often coming ahead of the customer and client.
Iain Jacob, CEO of Starcom Mediavest, agreed that specialism was still the case and that functions do overlap, but saw no reason why specialists could not work together for the client. He felt there was the opportunity for the buyer to become the “activator” – the first point of contact for the client, setting ideas in motion, and orchestrator of multiple strategies. But there was much to do: “transforming buying and research is our biggest challenge and we have not even started yet.”
Phil Georgiadis was frank – as ever – when questioned about the agency structures. “They are a mess and have been for ages, clients should pick their way through the structures and pick people,” he said. Fortunately for Georgiadis it was a view that Jim Hytner, marketing director of Barclays and a Walker client, endorsed, and he added: “too many agencies does not work for me, I need a perfect partner, and I want my media owner conversations to take place through that specialist partner. Media agencies have moved with time more than creative agencies, but good people are key – if Phil and Nicki (Hare) moved we would move with them.”
Mark Sherwood, strategy director of PHD, felt structures would change as agencies became multi-disciplinary, whilst Neil Hurman, strategic planning development director of OMD, agreed with Wilkins’ earlier comments about silos, and felt that agencies “need to strip costs out of the business to invest in better people.” He could not see scope to restructure fundamentally in groups under US ownership where margins were paramount and out-franked Georgiadis – “a possibility is units or divisions of consumer interest, but I am f****d if I know what the answer is.”
Douglas MacArthur reported on a consultancy project he had carried out on behalf of DDS, questioning 50 advertisers and media owners about the future of the media agency. “Advertisers will demand ROI from media owners – prove it or lose it, and will pay for strategy but less for buying, with more invoicing based upon results not the order.” The latter may have referred particularly to digital, where this is often the case already, but it did not find total resonance with broader comments from an advertiser panel earlier.
Oliver Cleaver, media director Europe of Kimberly-Clark, quizzed on ROI, responded that “most agencies would go bust if paid by results. Payback takes a long time (it’s rare within 12 months), and then it’s put at 68 cents in the dollar as the average for the top 25 advertisers in the States.” Also, there are “too many other influences”, commented Cleaver.
In theory the much-vaunted ROI promise should mean payment by results agreed Simon McPhillips, global media director of BP, “but that would be very harsh on agencies.”
Alan Rutherford, vice president, global media, Unilever, told how his company now had their own “360 planners and digital specialists, supported by agencies”, and there were many references besides this and Hurman’s to skills gaps within the agency world. Ian Jacob added a further dimension – “digital and consumer databases mean we have real-time behavioural data. We need people who can handle massive streams of data and make it usable – we need more analytical people.”