Writing in Forbes, Avi Dan discusses the notion of whether or not the agency of
record model is dead. But he comes to no real conclusion. I will. It is my belief that the agency of record is the best model and that brands who shop every last project out to the some specialty shop
or the lowest bidder are doing themselves a disservice in the long run. Why? Because every new shop wants to put its stamp on the brand -- and that almost always results in different iterations of the
brand promise when it should be consistent year after year after year. Yes, specialty shops can move quicker than most mainstream agencies, but unless a lasting bond is formed between agency and
brand, the two shall never come to a true understanding of one another. My suggestion? Agencies should get over their pride and partner -- truly partner -- with other entities that can provide what
the brand needs so that there is still one controlling interest in place overseeing brand consistency. Yes. It's much easier said than done. But that shouldn’t deter agencies from trying.
In a hilarious take on why agency credential pitches are pure folly, Brothers and Sisters CEO Matthew Charlton writes, "I think it starts in a bad place because unknown to the client, the agency has spent more time arguing about the font, font size and visuals in the PowerPoint and even longer on what to put on the reel than any one of their clients' business in the last three months. Agencies are obsessed with their creds." Having worked in many an agency, I can confirm that is, sadly, 100% true. He boils it all down to one hilarious equation: a) What The Client Wants (WTCW) = b) What The Agency Actually Wants To Talk About (WTAAWTTA) - c) What The Agency Has Actually Produced (WTAHAP) x d) Level Of Summary Exaggeration Required (LOSER).
Oh, this is rich. After the PR arm of Carmichael Lynch, known as Carmichael Lynch Spong, realized there might be confusion in the marketplace as to which entity is which, the agency has decided to spin off the PR unit as, simply, Spong. How long did it take them to figure that out? 23 years. Yes. 23 years. Of the change, Carmichael Lynch Spong Founder and President Doug Spong said: "On occasion, there’s confusion between whether Carmichael Lynch Spong is an advertising agency or if Carmichael Lynch is a PR firm, so it brings a lot of clarity to that, and in this day and age, clarity is good." Really, Doug? Really?
And if you've been living under a rock for the past day or two, it might interest you to know that JWT is changing its name back to J. Walter Thompson. Say what you will about that, but the real news is that Sir Martin Sorrell let the cat out of the bag at an executive breakfast Monday -- stealing the thunder right out from under JWT CEO Bob Jeffrey, who had been adhering to a plan to make the change later this year in December to coincide with the agency's 150th anniversary. Oops.
David Murdico, creative director and managing partner of Supercool Creative Agency puts forth a solid argument as to why startups should pay agencies more than brands do for the same work.
First of all, he notes a startup is an unknown entity and no one has ever heard of it before making it all the more difficult to create the necessary marketing program to achieve awareness and sale. He notes startups are generally more demanding than established brand marketers, often times because so much is at stake.
Perhaps the biggest problem area when it comes to crafting marketing for a startup is that up until the point the startup reached out to an agency, everything about the startup has, thus far, operated in an echo chamber with scant few nodding and bobbing their heads in agreement without truly vetting the idea or how the idea will be perceived in the real world.
Another challenge when working with a startup? They tend to change their mind a lot about, well, everything. And that can be a gigantic time suck. Check out Murdico's entire list here and file it away in your back pocket for use the next time you consider working with a startup.
This is gold! Gold, I tell you! And it's arrived just in time. As we all mourn the loss of our beloved Mad Men characters, they have been given renewed life, in the form of a Tumblr blog, as
digital natives spewing all the usual buzzword bingo that's so prevalent in today's marketing landscape.
Taking on the form of animated gifs, we have Don informing his secretary: "The future of advertising is socially integrated digital platforms." We have Peggy commending a co-worker saying: "Nice branded social post, bro." We have Don asking Peggy: "But does it work as a pre-roll." We have Don reacting to a proposed "Tinder-powered drone." We have Pete telling Don: "The CTRs need optimizing for behavioral targeting of Millennials."
And on and on and on. Brilliance.
Oh for f*ck's sake! Stop. Just please stop! Every ridiculous addition to the CxO title space just dumbs down the importance of the core four: CEO, CFO, COO and CIO. Maybe you can add CMO and CCO to
that list -- but chief data officer? Chief customer officer? And now...wait for it...chief native officer?
Yeah. Chief native officer. Or at least that's what Forbes Contributor Daniel Newman would like to see instituted. Newman argues that the merging of paid and earned media requires this CxO style oversight.
He furthers his point, writing: "The biggest reason to get a Native Officer is that while digital agencies and publishers work together, they don’t necessarily do so as a team. In fact, there are instances where they don’t see eye to eye. While publishers are great at creating content, they can treat branded content like a 'second-class citizen.' On the other hand, digital agencies consider themselves star content creators for brands. In such circumstances, there’s a pressing need for a 'dedicated task force' to exploit native ads to their fullest potential. The CNO should lead this pack, guiding the brand towards rewarding native advertising campaigns and best practices."
So what say you? Do we need the chief native officer?
Sort of like food brands still pimping low fat/no fat products when studies clearly indicate the human body needs fat, the office management world is still pimping open office space when many studies have shown it's a less productive solution than
more traditional office space.
That's not stopping the latest trend in office space, the Superwide. Superwide office space is large, one floor office space consisting of 100,000 square feet or more. Of the trend, Brookfield Property Partners Senior VP Duncan McCuaig said: “Large floors are absolutely in demand.” And “right now there is very little of this product in the city,” he added, referring to Manhattan.
Adam Kansler, managing director at financial data company Markit, loves the open office concept and says: “There’s something that gets lost” when a company is on multiple floors. You don’t get the same random moments of seeing someone from across the way, hearing that they’re working on a project, and saying, ‘Oh, I’m going to stop by.’ ”