One agency on record or multiple agencies – this has been an ongoing debate for some time now. Many corporates are adopting the latter model – which might work for some. But I have full faith in the single agency model.
This is because only one agency can remain with you through thick and thin – that not just develops creative but evolves the brand along with the marketer; that guides future thinking as much as it provides quick solutions in times of need. And it can do so because it knows the brand, its products and services, its customers and the company’s internal processes inside out. Something that an agency brought in for a project can never do.
Some things are integral to a client-agency relationship– collaboration, trust, patience and communication for getting to that unified brand message. In a way, it can be compared to a marriage. The success of any marriage depends on trust, patience and candid communication. Similarly, the best work that come from an agency-corporate liaison is based on the strengths of the two parties in a synergistic way. There has to be transparent expectations and clear definition for success. And deep rooted relationship, based on trust, lead to great business results.
Some corporates like watching their agencies fight it out, thinking that the best ideas come from such environment. But great work comes from creating an atmosphere of clear communication, mutual collaboration, brain-storming ideas and have specifies roles and responsibilities. Agencies on record provide continuity, stability and efficiencies that one-off, ad hoc, or project partners simply can't meet. Just like an one off relationship may be exciting. While it gives the thrill, no one probably at that moment thinks about the ramifications of that one off relationship.
Typically it has been noticed that the introduction of a second agency happens due to one or more of the following – (a) Brand has become stagnant. (b) The business is going through troubled times. (c) People quality at the agency has deteriorated. (d) Leadership at the client, agency or both sides has recently changed.
Often when the business or brand is challenged, the easiest thing to do is to make the incumbent agency the scapegoat. T o blame communication instead of solving for strategic direction. However in cases where there is indeed a genuine problem with the agency’s output, I believe it is important to discuss it openly and give the agency a fair chance. Only when they are not able to deliver even after this, should one choose to look out.
I also believe that when a second agency enters the picture, it is best to evaluate their work not just on a project but a more sustainable basis. If they are found good, then I would rather switch the entire brand building to them rather than have multiple agencies coexist. Multiple existence may breed competition for a while, but in the long run, are unsustainable. Also the original agency in order to save their share of the business, may start second guessing it’s client which almost always is disastrous as client are never the experts at creative.
I believe that ultimately, the corporate and the agency-on-record – should together take responsibility for the brand's strategic vision. We look at our agency partners as an extension of our marketing arm. They are part of the fabric of the company and turning around to find a partner who will understand what our brand needs, at what time is comforting.
Having been on both sides of the table I think the agency-on-record system of working is more effective. One needs people who understand what the marketer needs and how it works and who live, eat and sleep your brand along with the corporate. They form the nuts and bolts that will move the brand forward.
This is because only one agency can remain with you through thick and thin – that not just develops creative but evolves the brand along with the marketer; that guides future thinking as much as it provides quick solutions in times of need. And it can do so because it knows the brand, its products and services, its customers and the company’s internal processes inside out. Something that an agency brought in for a project can never do.
Some things are integral to a client-agency relationship– collaboration, trust, patience and communication for getting to that unified brand message. In a way, it can be compared to a marriage. The success of any marriage depends on trust, patience and candid communication. Similarly, the best work that come from an agency-corporate liaison is based on the strengths of the two parties in a synergistic way. There has to be transparent expectations and clear definition for success. And deep rooted relationship, based on trust, lead to great business results.
Some corporates like watching their agencies fight it out, thinking that the best ideas come from such environment. But great work comes from creating an atmosphere of clear communication, mutual collaboration, brain-storming ideas and have specifies roles and responsibilities. Agencies on record provide continuity, stability and efficiencies that one-off, ad hoc, or project partners simply can't meet. Just like an one off relationship may be exciting. While it gives the thrill, no one probably at that moment thinks about the ramifications of that one off relationship.
Typically it has been noticed that the introduction of a second agency happens due to one or more of the following – (a) Brand has become stagnant. (b) The business is going through troubled times. (c) People quality at the agency has deteriorated. (d) Leadership at the client, agency or both sides has recently changed.
Often when the business or brand is challenged, the easiest thing to do is to make the incumbent agency the scapegoat. T o blame communication instead of solving for strategic direction. However in cases where there is indeed a genuine problem with the agency’s output, I believe it is important to discuss it openly and give the agency a fair chance. Only when they are not able to deliver even after this, should one choose to look out.
I also believe that when a second agency enters the picture, it is best to evaluate their work not just on a project but a more sustainable basis. If they are found good, then I would rather switch the entire brand building to them rather than have multiple agencies coexist. Multiple existence may breed competition for a while, but in the long run, are unsustainable. Also the original agency in order to save their share of the business, may start second guessing it’s client which almost always is disastrous as client are never the experts at creative.
I believe that ultimately, the corporate and the agency-on-record – should together take responsibility for the brand's strategic vision. We look at our agency partners as an extension of our marketing arm. They are part of the fabric of the company and turning around to find a partner who will understand what our brand needs, at what time is comforting.
Having been on both sides of the table I think the agency-on-record system of working is more effective. One needs people who understand what the marketer needs and how it works and who live, eat and sleep your brand along with the corporate. They form the nuts and bolts that will move the brand forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment