Time to rinse ‘tech wash’ out of the system
The relationship between agencies and start-ups is a messy world where pockets of good practice are outweighed by the bad, writes Dominic Mills.
Earlier this year, the founder of a start-up used the term ‘tech wash’ to describe to me the state of play between start-ups and the agencies that seek to play an intermediary role in bringing these start-ups to work on their clients.
We’ve all seen agencies proudly announce labs, innovation directors, special units, speed dating sessions and Dragons’ Den-type functions. The trouble is, as my start-up contact tells me, a lot of it is window dressing. It’s tech talk, but not tech action.
Of course agencies mostly do it for the right reasons. As service businesses, they must bring new ideas to their clients to help them navigate an increasingly complicated world and gain competitive advantage.
If they don’t, they risk being disintermediated and left on the shelf. Some clients, like Unilever and Telefonica are doing it for themselves.
So are the likes of Accenture and Deloittes, who make no secret of their wish to eat some of the lunch that agencies have feasted on. And that’s before we even get to the likes of Google and Facebook.
These new ideas are the province of a legion of start-ups, part of a surprisingly rich scene in the UK, and not just in Shoreditch either.
I know this because, as part of an initiative to bring start-ups and agencies closer together, the IPA commissioned me to write a scene setter. To do this, I spent weeks interviewing all parties concerned: start-ups, incubators, accelerators, investors, agencies and clients.
You can read the results here on a dedicated IPA hub, as well as a series of blog posts over the next few weeks or so from key protagonists.
As the IPA suspected when it set out on this road, and what I found, was…well, let’s put it this way…a messy world where pockets of good practice were outweighed by the bad.
This doesn’t suit any party, and one of the things I learnt was that the start-up world is highly interconnected. Talk about those agencies that play the tech wash game gets around quickly. It queers the pitch for everyone.
[advert position=”left”]
The IPA initiative gets under way properly at Adweek on 20 April when I’ll be hosting a panel discussion. You can read more about it here.
The panel comprises: David Pattison, the P of PHD and a former IPA President; Rose Lewis of accelerator Collider; Hannah Blake, who runs MEC’s open innovation unit, Tonic; and start-up entrepreneur Christina Richardson of Openr.
The idea is to air the issues, before further work on finding out what’s good and bad, and eventually moving to a setting out a code of conduct.
From what I’ve seen and heard moving around in this area, setting out some simple guidelines to cover the interaction between agencies and start-ups will make a big difference.
Some of the issues that will be aired include:
– A tendency to treat start-ups like other suppliers (such as media owners or production companies), and tie them up with red tape, procurement and legals. In fact, start-ups are fragile businesses, and treating them like other suppliers can kill them.
– A complicated and often sclerotic decision-making process, that keeps start-ups hanging on, sometimes pointlessly. Too many people have the power to say ‘no’, and the person who can say ‘yes’ can’t be found. Too many meetings, not enough decisions.
– Asking for exclusivity and/or a free trial.
– Agency or client opacity about processes, decision-making and budgets.
– A lack of commitment from the top of agencies, and lack of dedicated resource.
– A mis-match of expectations on time frames and scope. The agency sees an experiment with new technology at the margins of a campaign, while the start-up thinks it’s central.
Of course, it should be said, the problems are not all on one side. For their part, start-ups often:
– Present to clients and agencies as though they are investors.
– Focus on the tech, not the consumer benefit.
– Offer the same solution to different clients (i.e. a retailer and a mobile phone operator).
– Lack a minimum viable product.
This sounds like a long list of issues. But I’m convinced the problems can be overcome. I’ve seen a few agencies that have really got it right.
Their secrets aren’t that hard to divine: top management is committed, dedicated resource is available, red tape is minimised, staff are empowered, and they show start-ups respect.
If you’re interested in the issue, or wish to contribute to the debate, join us at The Sun Studio at 3.30pm on 20 April.
Time Inc overdoses on ‘passion’
It’s Adweek, and already I’ve had it with all the passion on show. Everybody’s getting passionate about everything…storytelling, data, algorithms, creativity, blah blah blah.
Here’s a trailer from Time Inc for a session featuring Daisy Lowe (er, why exactly?) that overdoses on passion.
Live the Passion: Turning your passion into a career
“We are a passionate bunch here at Time Inc. UK. How passionate are you about what you do? Do you work to live or live to work? Mark Frith, Editor in Chief, Now & Look magazines hosts a panel including acting royalty Richard E. Grant, ex Blur guitarist Alex James and model Daisy Lowe. The panel will discuss how they’ve managed to turn their passion into a career and make money doing what they love the most
“It’s important to love what you do. At Time Inc. UK we have the most passionate people working with a huge range of iconic brands. Come along and hear some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry tell us how they turned their personal passion into something big. Mark Frith, Editor in Chief, Now & Look magazines will host a panel including acting royalty Richard E. Grant, ex Blur guitarist Alex James and model Daisy Lowe. The panel will discuss how they’ve managed to turn their passion into a career; from fragrance to healthy food to creating award winning cheeses.”
I’m left asking the question: so chuffin’ what?
Anyway, here’s my passion: avoiding sessions of this kind like the plague.