• by Alicia Gehring , Op-Ed Contributor, October 31, 2016

The total ramifications of the Association of National Advertisers’ recent report on media transparency have yet to be fully realized.  But at the very least, the report’s revelations about large media holding companies and their agencies pushing their own digital partnerships and buying tools on clients suggest that bigger is not necessarily better.  Pressure on large agencies to generate revenue and profits apparently have created a breach of trust between client and agency that goes deeper than ever before. 

The irony here is that the “bigger is better” philosophy is precisely why many clients chose their media agencies in the first place.  Clients were convinced that the buying power wielded by these agencies—made possible by the massive accounts they collectively represented—gave them more leverage in the marketplace and allowed them to secure more favorable rates for their clients. 

This is undoubtedly true.  After all, it’s difficult to compete with the multi-billion-dollar buying power of companies like GroupM, OMG, and Publicis.  But now that the transparency issue has reared its head, the question must be asked: Can transparency and buying power comfortably co-exist? 

I believe there’s an argument to be made that genuine transparency trumps (no pun intended) buying power, no matter how big it might be, and can help strengthen the level of trust that needs to exist between agencies and clients.  Here’s why. 

• Transparency ensures agencies are not taking more dollars than agreed to when they negotiate with media companies and instead serves as an incentive to over-deliver on promises made to the client. 

• Buying power is no longer a result solely of volume, but relationships.  Buyers who have solid, long-term relationships with media sellers are more likely to find the right program and maximize the budget in the process. 

• While some big agencies have invested in technology and offering a client an experience with a lot of bells and whistles, the rest of buying is done by mutual agreement and partnership. Transparency and partnership ensure that the client and agency are working openly together for a common goal.  When you take away all the bells and whistles, do you have a partner that is invested in mutual success? 

• Media sellers are more likely to agree to favorable terms for buyers without the threat of losing business hanging over their heads if they don’t pony up rebates or huge volume discounts. 

• The agencies’ buying power wouldn’t exist were it not for the clients, who should always insist on knowing the true metrics/results of their advertising dollars.   Every agency—no matter how large or influential—should be required to pass along any cost benefits to their clients and reveal full details of the spending breakdown.  

Clients need to remember that when they shop for a new ad agency, they’re not just hiring a vendor. They’re hiring a partner, a company that is invested in their success, because both partners know success for one is actually success for both. This is a long-term, mutually beneficial agreement between people who have the same goal – growth. It’s called playing the long game.  It’s also about relationships. 

So the next time you start thinking about who to partner with on the road to success, here are a few questions to consider about the agencies seeking your business: 

v  Have they demonstrated that they share your same passion?

v  Are they in it this game for the same reasons you are?

v  Does their philosophy match yours?

v  Will they give your brand the time and loyalty it deserves?

v  Do they know how you take your coffee because you get together weekly over coffee to see how things are going? 

Advertising doesn’t happen in silos, in departments, or on specific floors of an agency’s office.  It happens when partners discuss objectives, throw out ideas to see what sticks, and work together and believe in the work they have created together, as true partners.