Is Agency Monogamy Dead? :: nelson schmidt

Is Agency Monogamy Dead?

A recent AdAge article questioned the effectiveness of brands working with a single agency of record, as opposed to a network of boutique partners. This provocatively titled article, Study: Clients Want Multiple Partners, described how many companies are forgoing a single agency for an “open-source model,” often managed project-by-project. The study, by the Corporate Executive Board, includes this analysis of the findings:

The CEB recommends that clients seek numerous partners “whose proximity to individual consumer segments equips them with the knowledge needed to craft deeply resonant communications.” It also recommends that clients build the capability to manage dynamic groups of marketing partners.

This call to companies to better “manage dynamic groups” of partners makes sense, because the payoff is a marketing experience that does a better job of resonating with a brand’s many audiences. However, this presumes that the full service agency model has not adapted to these same marketing demands, and found ways to add a tremendous amount of value to the right clients.

In order to work, this “open-source model,” as it is termed in the article, must be managed by an internal (i.e., “client side”) team that can do all of the following well:

Identify partners who can not only do the work, but work within a larger vision
Manage these one-off projects in a fast-paced and ever-changing business environment
Measure the success of these projects in a way that is relevant, actionable and integrated with the greater corporate goals

Many full service marketing communications firms, including Nelson Schmidt, have addressed these requirements by:

Creating their own network of specialized partners, available on an as-needed basis
Establishing sophisticated project management processes that often rival anything a client can support internally
Applying advanced analytics in order to report ROI back to their clients on every project managed

Market conditions are undeniably changing, and the old, reliable agency models are failing to make the grade. But before a brand steward looks to adding to his or her own marketing infrastructure, that person should consider finding an agency of record that has recognized these needs and adapted with an infrastructure reflecting these new realities.

Ultimately, every marketer is striving to invest resources in a way that is both efficient and effective. Agencies that can prove their effectiveness can make a strong case that their roles as a single, “lead” agency is more efficient than the client taking on the management of an array of smaller, specialized partners.

Nelson-Schmidt

Is Agency Monogamy Dead?